People v. Isaac

Decision Date25 July 1994
Citation206 A.D.2d 545,616 N.Y.S.2d 46
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Dante ISAAC, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Matthew Muraskin, Hempstead (Kent V. Moston and Alfred O'Connor, of counsel), for appellant.

Denis Dillon, Dist. Atty., Mineola (Judith R. Sternberg and Margaret E. Mainusch, of counsel), for respondent.

Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and BALLETTA, JOY and FRIEDMANN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.), rendered December 14, 1990, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third 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 reversed, on the law and the facts, the plea is vacated, that branch of the motion which was to suppress physical evidence is granted, the indictment is dismissed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for the entry of an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50.

On January 31, 1990, at approximately 10:45 P.M., a confidential informant telephoned Detective Frank Whitson of the Hempstead Police Department. The informant, who had previously worked with Whitson for one month, advised the detective that the defendant Dante Isaac, Kenneth Dewberry, and his girlfriend were leaving Hempstead in an old, dirty, white Buick, going "uptown" to "pick up", and intended thereafter to return to Terrace Avenue in Hempstead or the Capri Motor Inn in West Hempstead. No mention of drugs was made during the conversation between the confidential informant and Whitson, nor was there any indication of precisely what drug or controlled substance, if any, the group was going to buy. Significantly, the informant did not indicate how she obtained the information she related to the detective.

Whitson then went to the Capri Motor Inn. At about 3:00 A.M. the next morning, he observed an automobile that fit the general description given by the informant pull into the parking lot, and he called for assistance. Dewberry emerged from the Buick, leaving the driver's door open, and walked to the inn's office. When Dewberry emerged from the office, Whitson asked him for his license and registration. Dewberry returned to the Buick and searched his glove compartment for the documents. Detective Frank Puma and other police officers arrived at the scene. The police officers removed the occupants, including the defendant and his accomplice, Albert Walker, from the vehicle, and placed them in police department vehicles.

As the occupants were being removed from the Buick, Detective Puma observed a brown paper bag on the front seat of the car, by the "hump" on the floor separating the driver's seat from the passenger seat. Puma removed the bag, opened it, and observed plastic bags containing a white rock-like substance that appeared to him to be cocaine.

At a pretrial hearing,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • People v. Jean-Charles, JEAN-CHARLE
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 1 Abril 1996
    ...have been based upon personal knowledge (see, People v. Bigelow, 66 N.Y.2d 417, 424, 497 N.Y.S.2d 630, 488 N.E.2d 451; People v. Isaac, 206 A.D.2d 545, 616 N.Y.S.2d 46). In order to satisfy the "basis-of-knowledge" prong, it is not necessary that the informant have personally viewed the cri......
  • People v. Voner
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 29 Junio 2010
    ...People v. Jackson, 235 A.D.2d 923, 924, 653 N.Y.S.2d 419; People v. Beruvais, 231 A.D.2d 733, 734, 648 N.Y.S.2d 117; People v. Isaac, 206 A.D.2d 545, 616 N.Y.S.2d 46). McMahon first saw the defendant's vehicle approximately half a mile away from the reservation where the cigarettes had alle......
  • People v. Holmes
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 25 Julio 1994
  • People v. Dewberry
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 8 Enero 1996
    ...of our previous determination in the codefendants' appeals (see, People v. Walker, 206 A.D.2d 555, 616 N.Y.S.2d 198; People v. Isaac, 206 A.D.2d 545, 616 N.Y.S.2d 46) that the basis of knowledge prong of the Aguilar- Spinelli test (see, Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 89 S.Ct. 584,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT