People v. Grant
| Decision Date | 12 April 2011 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,v.Quasii GRANT, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
83 A.D.3d 862
921 N.Y.S.2d 285
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 03084
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Quasii GRANT, appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
April 12, 2011.
[921 N.Y.S.2d 285]
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Erica Horwitz of counsel), for appellant.Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano and Sharon Y. Brodt of counsel; Lorrie A. Zinno on the brief), for respondent.
[921 N.Y.S.2d 286]
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ARIEL E. BELEN, and CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JJ.
[83 A.D.3d 862] Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Aloise, J.), rendered April 20, 2009, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was ineffective. Although the defendant concedes that he executed a written waiver of his right to appeal, the Supreme Court's failure to make any inquiry on the record as to whether the defendant[83 A.D.3d 863] understood the implication of the appellate rights he was waiving renders the waiver invalid ( see People v. DeSimone, 80 N.Y.2d 273, 283, 590 N.Y.S.2d 46, 604 N.E.2d 108; People v. Bradshaw, 76 A.D.3d 566, 569–570, 906 N.Y.S.2d 93, lv. granted 15 N.Y.3d 896, 912 N.Y.S.2d 585, 938 N.E.2d 1020; cf. People v. Ramos, 7 N.Y.3d 737, 819 N.Y.S.2d 853, 853 N.E.2d 222).
The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress the gun recovered from his person during a traffic stop. On a motion to suppress evidence, the defendant bears the ultimate burden of proof when challenging the legality of a search and seizure ( see People v. Whitehurst, 25 N.Y.2d 389, 391, 306 N.Y.S.2d 673, 254 N.E.2d 905), but the People bear the initial burden of showing the legality of the police conduct ( id. at 391, 306 N.Y.S.2d 673, 254 N.E.2d 905; see People v. Blinker, 80 A.D.3d 619, 915 N.Y.S.2d 593; People v. James, 72 A.D.3d 844, 898 N.Y.S.2d 635; People v. Henderson, 57 A.D.3d 562, 563, 868 N.Y.S.2d 299). The hearing court's credibility determinations are entitled to great deference on appeal and will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record ( see People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Brown
...510, 950 N.Y.S.2d 77, 973 N.E.2d 172 ), including, "the implication of the appellate rights he [or she] was waiving" ( People v. Grant, 83 A.D.3d 862, 863, 921 N.Y.S.2d 285 ; see People v. McCaskell, 206 A.D.2d 547, 548, 615 N.Y.S.2d 55 ). The content of the written waiver is relevant to th......
-
People v. Roger
...259, 261 (2nd Dept.2008); See also: People v. Harris, 186 A.D.2d 148, 587 N.Y.S.2d 425 (2nd Dept.1992); People v. Grant, 83 AD3d 862, 921 N.Y.S.2d 285 (2nd Dept.2011) Such a temporary roadside detention pursuant to a routine traffic stop is not custodial in nature. People v. Myers, 1 AD3d 3......
-
People v. Brown
...41 N.Y.2d 876, 362 N.E.2d 609, 393 N.Y.S.2d 978 [1977], cert denied 434 U.S. 939, 98 S.Ct. 431, 54 L.Ed.2d 299 [1997] ; People v. Grant, 83 A.D.3d 862, 863, 921 N.Y.S.2d 285 [2011] ; People v. Willis, 66 A.D.3d 926, 887 N.Y.S.2d 634 [2009]. See also Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 98 S......
-
People v. Diaz
...their initial burden, the defendant bears the ultimate burden of proving the illegality of the search and seizure (see People v. Grant, 83 A.D.3d 862, 863, 921 N.Y.S.2d 285 ; People v. Clough, 70 A.D.3d 474, 895 N.Y.S.2d 52 ). The credibility determinations of a hearing court, which saw and......