People v. Givhan
Decision Date | 03 November 2010 |
Citation | 78 A.D.3d 730,911 N.Y.S.2d 83 |
Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Ronald GIVHAN, appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
78 A.D.3d 730
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Ronald GIVHAN, appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Nov. 3, 2010.
Stephen J. Pittari, White Plains, N.Y. (David B. Weisfuse of counsel), for appellant.
Janet DiFiore, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Laurie Sapakoff, Richard Longworth Hecht, and Anthony J. Servino of counsel), for respondent.
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, RANDALL T. ENG, and PLUMMER E. LOTT, JJ.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Cohen, J.), rendered February 3,
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence. The record does not support the defendant's contention that the arresting officer's testimony was patently tailored to overcome constitutional objections, or was otherwise unworthy of belief ( see People v. Muriello, 71 A.D.3d 1050, 898 N.Y.S.2d 566; People v. Blankumsce, 66 A.D.3d 692, 693, 885 N.Y.S.2d 633; People v. Coles, 62 A.D.3d 1022, 1023, 878 N.Y.S.2d 913; People v. Cooks, 57 A.D.3d 796, 797, 870 N.Y.S.2d 80; People v. Rivera, 27 A.D.3d 489, 490, 812 N.Y.S.2d 575).
Furthermore, we reject the defendant's claim that he was deprived of a fair trial because the arresting officer was permitted to testify as to the content of a tip received from an anonymous informant indicating that a man matching the defendant's description was in possession of a gun. The challenged testimony was properly admitted to provide background information as to why the officer approached the defendant and to prevent the jury from drawing an unfair inference that the officer arbitrarily stopped the defendant ( see People v. Tosca, 98 N.Y.2d 660, 661, 746 N.Y.S.2d 276, 773 N.E.2d 1014; People v. Johnson, 76 A.D.3d 1103, 908 N.Y.S.2d 247; People v. Valdez, 69 A.D.3d 452, 453, 893 N.Y.S.2d 527; People v. Stevenson, 67 A.D.3d 605, 889 N.Y.S.2d 182; People v. Jenkins, 49 A.D.3d 780, 853 N.Y.S.2d 629; People v. Bailey, 21 A.D.3d 383, 384, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Arrospide v. Murphy
-
Donato v. Pasciuta
...or where there are issues of credibility (see Chimbo v. Bolivar, 142 A.D.3d 944, 37 N.Y.S.3d 339 [2d Dept 2016]; Benetatos v. Comerford, 78 A.D.3d 730, 911 N.Y.S.2d 155 [2d Dept. 2010]). "A plaintiff in a negligence action moving for summary judgment on the issue of liability must establish......
-
Magee v. Zeman
...may be drawn from the evidence, or where there are issues of credibility (see Chimbo v. Bolivar, supra; Benetatos v. Cometford, 78 A.D.3d 730, 911 N.Y.S.2d 155 [2d Dept. 2010]). Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1141 requires that "[t]he driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left within an i......
-
Dominguez v. Algieri
...inferences may be drawn from the evidence, or where there are issues of credibility (see Chimbo v Bolivar, supra; Benetatos v Comerford, 78 A.D.3d 730, 911 N.Y.S.2d 155 [2d Dept 2010]). Pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic law § 1231, "every person riding a bicycle ... upon a roadway shall be ........