People v. Comforto
| Decision Date | 08 May 1984 |
| Parties | , 465 N.E.2d 354 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert A. COMFORTO, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
J. Irwin Shapiro, Mineola, and Daniel M. Kolko, New York City, for appellant.
Patrick Henry, Dist. Atty., Riverhead, (Gabrielle Weglein, Asst. Dist. Atty., Hauppauge, of counsel), for respondent.
The order of the Appellate Division, 93 A.D.2d 1003, 462 N.Y.S.2d 733, should be affirmed.
Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree after the police seized more than four ounces of cocaine from his home. The entry into defendant's home and seizure of the contraband was made pursuant to a warrant issued on the basis of information supplied by an informant. The question on this appeal is whether the issuing magistrate had sufficient information before him to make a reasoned determination that the tip was credible and that its substance was derived in a reliable way.
The warrant application was in the form of an affidavit by a State trooper recounting the statements of the informant, who had observed cocaine in defendant's home the previous day. Attached to the sworn statement was a transcript of a meeting between a police investigator and the informant, in which the informant described the interior of defendant's home, the place in the home where the cocaine was kept, and the circumstances under which the informant had occasion to observe the cocaine.
On this appeal, defendant does not argue that the substance of the informant's tip, that cocaine was located in defendant's home, could not form a basis for a determination of probable cause or that the asserted means (firsthand observation) by which the informant gained this information could not be deemed reliable. Rather, defendant argues that there was insufficient information before the magistrate for him to infer that the particular information was credible or that the informant was trustworthy.
It is true that on this record no reasonable inference could be drawn that the informant himself was trustworthy. He was not merely a citizen-informant coming forward of his own free will. Indeed, the information was forthcoming only after the informant, having been observed by an undercover officer entering and exiting defendants home, was arrested and five ounces of cocaine was taken from his person. Moreover, the warrant application...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Campos
...against his own penal interest is a classic hallmark of reliability for Aguilar–Spinelli purposes. See People v. Comforto, 62 N.Y.2d 725, 476 N.Y.S.2d 815, 465 N.E.2d 354 (1984) (informant's admission against interest helped to establish his reliability for Aguilar purposes); People v. Stro......
-
People v. Greene
...S.Ct. 2075, 29 L.Ed.2d 723; People v. Johnson, supra, 66 N.Y.2d at 403-404, 497 N.Y.S.2d 618, 488 N.E.2d 439; People v. Comforto, 62 N.Y.2d 725, 476 N.Y.S.2d 815, 465 N.E.2d 354). Contrary to the defendant's specific contention, Richard's statements would support a charge of hindering prose......
-
Lewis v. Caputo
...accepted as true or, in the absence of such showing, that the specific information given is reliable”]; People v. Comforto, 62 N.Y.2d 725, 727, 476 N.Y.S.2d 815, 465 N.E.2d 354 [1984] ). In particular, where—as here—the informant is himself a criminal suspect and thus not generally trustwor......
-
People v. Johnson
...S.Ct. 898, 34 L.Ed.2d 703) or an admission against penal interest which serves the function of an oath (see, People v. Comforto, 62 N.Y.2d 725, 476 N.Y.S.2d 815, 465 N.E.2d 354; United States v. Harris, 403 U.S. 573, 91 S.Ct. 2075, 29 L.Ed.2d 723). The informant's veracity may also be estab......