People v. Martin
| Decision Date | 20 November 1995 |
| Citation | 221 A.D.2d 568,634 N.Y.S.2d 147 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Shawn MARTIN, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Carol Kahn, New York City, for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Roseann B. MacKechnie and Nancy F. Talcott, of counsel), for respondent.
Before O'BRIEN, J.P., and SANTUCCI, JOY and FRIEDMANN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), rendered November 17, 1993, convicting him of murder in the second degree and attempted murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of those branches of the defendant's omnibus motion which were to suppress identification testimony and his statements to law enforcement officials.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the People failed to establish probable cause for his arrest because the police relied upon hearsay information which did not satisfy the Aguilar- Spinelli test (see, Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21 L.Ed.2d 637; Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723). We find this contention to be without merit. "It is well settled that information provided by an identified citizen accusing another individual of a specific crime is legally sufficient to provide the police with probable cause to arrest" (People v. Burton, 194 A.D.2d 683, 684, 599 N.Y.S.2d 108; see, People v. Newton, 180 A.D.2d 764, 580 N.Y.S.2d 397; People v. Douglas, 138 A.D.2d 731, 732, 526 N.Y.S.2d 544). When the witness supplying information to the police is an identified citizen relating information about a crime the citizen personally observed, the People need not make an independent showing of the witness' reliability and basis of knowledge (see, e.g., People v. Rivera, 210 A.D.2d 895, 620 N.Y.S.2d 652; People v. Robbins, 198 A.D.2d 451, 604 N.Y.S.2d 155).
The evidence adduced at the suppression hearing established that the detective investigating the crime spoke to three civilian witnesses. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record reveals that the witnesses' names were known to the police. The names were merely withheld during the suppression hearing, with the defendant's consent. From these witnesses, the detective learned that one of the perpetrators of the crime, known as Spooney, lived in a housing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Bell
...853 N.Y.S.2d 364; People v. Griffin, 15 A.D.3d 502, 790 N.Y.S.2d 494; People v. Soto, 279 A.D.2d 592, 719 N.Y.S.2d 603; People v. Martin, 221 A.D.2d 568, 568–569, 634 N.Y.S.2d 147; People v. Pagan, 184 A.D.2d 738, 585 N.Y.S.2d 453). Furthermore, that same citizen identified the defendant's ......
-
People v. Rose
...cause that was derived from two identifications of him as the perpetrator (see People v Read, 74 A.D.3d 1245; see also People v Martin, 221 A.D.2d 568). Consequently, as the YPD police officers who had arrested the defendant during the late night hours of March 5, 2021, were lawfully entitl......
- People v. Malik
-
People v. Henry
...accusing them of a specific crime is legally sufficient to provide the police with probable cause to arrest. See, People v. Martin, 221 A.D.2d 568, 634 N.Y.S.2d 147 [2d Dept., 1995]. Here, Nephatiara Sease alleged to the police that defendant shot at her feet inside of 52 Andrea Place and s......