People v. Delgado
| Decision Date | 31 May 1994 |
| Citation | 204 A.D.2d 242,612 N.Y.S.2d 154 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jorge DELGADO, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Before CARRO, J.P., and ELLERIN, WALLACH and RUBIN, JJ.
Judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Arlene Silverman, J.), rendered January 22, 1991, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of from 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.
Pursuant to a search warrant, police recovered 173 vials of cocaine from the bedroom of an apartment located at 421 East 157th Street, Bronx County. Defendant, who was arrested at the premises, claimed that he was visiting his paramour, Lydia Rivera. His motion to suppress the evidence was originally denied for lack of standing (CPL 710.60[3] on the inappropriate ground that defendant did not reside at the premises (Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91, 110 S.Ct. 1684, 109 L.Ed.2d 85). This Court remanded the case for a Mapp hearing (People v. Fuentes-Borda, 186 A.D.2d 405, 589 N.Y.S.2d 5) to determine if defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy (United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. 83, 100 S.Ct. 2547, 65 L.Ed.2d 619) as an overnight guest of Ms. Rivera (People v. Cordoba, 179 A.D.2d 404, 578 N.Y.S.2d 416), 192 A.D.2d 318, 595 N.Y.S.2d 467.
Supreme Court found that, at the time the search warrant was executed, defendant resided in Flushing, Queens in an apartment he had shared with Lydia Rivera for two or three years. Ms. Rivera had gone to the Bronx apartment temporarily after her stepfather, the alleged lessee, was jailed on unspecified charges. Defendant continued to reside in the Queens apartment, and all his clothing and furnishings remained there. Defendant testified that he had gone to the Bronx apartment to repair some windows, taking a change of clothes with him. He said that he had never previously stayed at that apartment, giving as the reason, "I don't like the place." Defendant indicated that he had formed no definite intention to remain overnight, conceding that there was virtually no furniture in the premises except for a sofa in the living room. Defendant was not even sure if the apartment had a bed.
Supreme Court's finding that defendant did not travel to the Bronx apartment to repair windows and to stay overnight is supported by the credible...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Jose
...757, 538 N.E.2d 76)" (People v. Whitfield, 81 N.Y.2d 904, 905-906, 597 N.Y.S.2d 641, 613 N.E.2d 547; see also, People v. Delgado, 204 A.D.2d 242, 612 N.Y.S.2d 154, lv. denied 84 N.Y.2d 825, 617 N.Y.S.2d 145, 641 N.E.2d 166). The hearing court on remand (Michael J. Obus, J.) was not bound, a......
-
People v. Garcia
...506 N.Y.S.2d 1052, 498 N.E.2d 154) and that defendant lacked standing to challenge the search of the apartment (see, People v. Delgado, 204 A.D.2d 242, 612 N.Y.S.2d 154, lv. denied 84 N.Y.2d 825, 617 N.Y.S.2d 145, 641 N.E.2d 166). We reject the contention that the court abused its discretio......
-
People v. Delgado
...145 617 N.Y.S.2d 145 84 N.Y.2d 825, 641 N.E.2d 166 People v. Delgado Court of Appeals of New York Aug 22, 1994 Simons, J. 204 A.D.2d 242, 612 N.Y.S.2d 154 App.Div. 1, Bronx Denied. ...