People v. McTootle
| Decision Date | 12 October 1993 |
| Citation | 197 A.D.2d 597,602 N.Y.S.2d 425 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Gregory McTOOTLE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
John J. Marshall, Jr., for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Denis Dillon, Dist. Atty., Mineola (John F. McGlynn and Alexis Kriedman, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and SULLIVAN, COPERTINO, and PIZZUTO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.), rendered December 20, 1988, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal trespass in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, 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.
We find no merit to the defendant's contention that his arrest was not based on probable cause. The evidence adduced at the hearing indicates that the arresting detective witnessed the defendant push his way into an apartment. After verifying with the tenant that the defendant had no right to enter her apartment, the detective had probable cause to arrest the defendant for criminal trespass and to search him incident to that arrest (see, People v. Gonzalez, 138 A.D.2d 622, 526 N.Y.S.2d 208). Therefore, we find that the hearing court properly refused to suppress the cocaine recovered as a result of the post-arrest search of the defendant.
Furthermore, we find that there is no merit to the defendant's contention that there was legally insufficient evidence supporting his convictions of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree. It is well-settled that an expert who tested the substance recovered for the presence of cocaine may not rely solely upon a test involving a comparison of the substance to a known standard, when the expert failed to also test the known standard (see, People v. Branton, 67 A.D.2d 664, 412 N.Y.S.2d 35; People v. Miller, 57 A.D.2d 668, 393 N.Y.S.2d 679). However, such a test may be relied upon by the expert, in conjunction with a series of different tests, not all involving a known standard, when testifying as to an opinion that the substance contained cocaine (see, People...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Howard
...(see, People v. Castle, 251 A.D.2d 891, 674 N.Y.S.2d 840, lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 923, 680 N.Y.S.2d 465, 703 N.E.2d 277; People v. McTootle, 197 A.D.2d 597, 602 N.Y.S.2d 425, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 975, 642 N.Y.S.2d 205, 664 N.E.2d 1268). Nor is the verdict against the weight of the evidence (se......
-
People v. Fallen
...test which did not involve the use of known standards (see, e.g., People v. Burnett, 245 A.D.2d 460, 666 N.Y.S.2d 658; People v. McTootle, 197 A.D.2d 597, 602 N.Y.S.2d 425, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 975, 642 N.Y.S.2d 205, 664 N.E.2d 1268; People v. Rotundo, 194 A.D.2d 943, 945-946, 599 N.Y.S.2d ......
-
People v. Castle
...that they performed chemical analysis to verify the nature of the known standard they employed in their testing (see, People v. McTootle, 197 A.D.2d 597, 602 N.Y.S.2d 425, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 975, 642 N.Y.S.2d 205, 664 N.E.2d 1268), because not all of the tests they performed required comp......
-
People v. McCarthy
...testimony sufficiently established the presence of cocaine in the substance bought by the undercover officer (see, People v. McTootle, 197 A.D.2d 597, 602 N.Y.S.2d 425; People v. Garcia, 190 A.D.2d 749, 593 N.Y.S.2d The defendant's sentence is not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d......