From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Pilgrim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 16, 1997
240 A.D.2d 596 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

June 16, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, his detention by the police immediately after the incident was supported by reasonable suspicion ( see, People v. Sierra, 83 N.Y.2d 928; People v. Martinez, 80 N.Y.2d 444; People v. Landy, 59 N.Y.2d 369; People v. Cantor, 36 N.Y.2d 106; People v. Lypka, 36 N.Y.2d 210). Accordingly, the hearing court correctly denied those branches of his omnibus motion which were to suppress physical evidence, identification testimony, and statements made by him to law enforcement officials.

As we determined on the appeal of the codefendant, the trial court correctly received into evidence a tape recording of an anonymous telephone call to the 911 emergency number under the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule ( see, People v. Ross, 237 A.D.2d 467).

The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see, People v. Brooks, 209 A.D.2d 427; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

O'Brien, J.P., Thompson, Pizzuto and Friedmann, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Pilgrim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 16, 1997
240 A.D.2d 596 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Pilgrim

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANDRE PILGRIM…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 16, 1997

Citations

240 A.D.2d 596 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
659 N.Y.S.2d 982