People v. Dixon
| Decision Date | 18 May 1987 |
| Citation | 516 N.Y.S.2d 16,130 A.D.2d 680 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Lawrence DIXON, a/k/a Lawrence Billings, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Dominic J. Sichenzia, Garden City, for appellant.
Lawrence Dixon, pro se.
Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood, Lisa Margaret Smith and Patricia Leitner, Brooklyn, of counsel), for respondent.
Before LAWRENCE, J.P., and EIBER, SULLIVAN and HARWOOD, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeals by the defendant from (1) from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schwartzwald, J.), rendered June 23, 1982, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, under Indictment No. 4108/77, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, (2) from a judgment of the same court, rendered December 22, 1983, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree under Indictment No. 4495/78, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, (3) from a judgment of the same court, also rendered December 22, 1983, convicting him of bail jumping in the first degree under Indictment No. 3023/83, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, (4) by permission, from an order of the same court, dated November 11, 1983, which denied his pro se motion to vacate the judgment rendered June 23, 1982, and (5) by permission, from two orders of the same court, dated December 15, 1983, and May 30, 1984, respectively, which denied his motions to vacate the judgments. The appeals bring up for review the denial, after a hearing (Potoker, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.
ORDERED that the judgments and orders are affirmed.
The hearing court's determination that the arresting officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant as he was getting out of his car on a public street finds ample support in the record and should not be disturbed (see, People v. De Vito, 114 A.D.2d 374, 493 N.Y.S.2d 892). The officers had the right to seize a gun which was only partially hidden on the front seat of the car pursuant to the "plain view" doctrine (see, People v. Roth, 66 N.Y.2d 688, 690, 496 N.Y.S.2d 413, 487 N.E.2d 270; People v. Spinelli, 35 N.Y.2d 77, 81, 358 N.Y.S.2d 743, 315 N.E.2d 792). Having found the gun in the car, the officers were required to impound the vehicle pursuant to Police Department...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dixon v. Miller
...648 N.E.2d 455, 458, 624 N.Y.S.2d 79, 82 (1995), and Dixon's direct appeal was completed six years earlier, see People v. Dixon, 130 A.D.2d 680, 516 N.Y.S.2d 16 (2d Dep't), leave denied, 70 N.Y.2d 645, 512 N.E.2d 563, 518 N.Y.S.2d 1037 The Government's argument fails, however, for the reaso......
-
Dixon v. Miller
...sentence him in absentia. The appellate court affirmed both his conviction and sentence without discussion. See People v. Dixon, 130 A.D.2d 680, 516 N.Y.S.2d 16 (2d Dep't 1987). Leave to appeal was denied by the appellate court on June 24, 1987. See People v. Dixon, 70 N.Y.2d 645, 518 N.Y.S......
-
People v. Solano
...car ( cf., People v. Cammock, 144 A.D.2d 375, 533 N.Y.S.2d 918; People v. Italia, 138 A.D.2d 743, 744, 526 N.Y.S.2d 556; People v. Dixon, 130 A.D.2d 680, 516 N.Y.S.2d 16, see also, People v. Bookless, 120 A.D.2d 950, 502 N.Y.S.2d 846; State v. Shamblin, Utah App., 763 P.2d 425; State v. Wel......
-
People v. Brooks
...823; see also, People v. Cammock, 144 A.D.2d 375, 533 N.Y.S.2d 918; People v. Italia, 138 A.D.2d 743, 526 N.Y.S.2d 556; People v. Dixon, 130 A.D.2d 680, 516 N.Y.S.2d 16). The defendant was stopped in the vicinity of a residence that had been burglarized, shortly after the burglary occurred.......