People v. Meredith
| Decision Date | 22 February 1994 |
| Citation | 201 A.D.2d 674,607 N.Y.S.2d 979 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Larry MEREDITH, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (James Branden, of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Roseann B. MacKechnie, Linda Breen, and Fredericka Bashir, of counsel), for respondent.
Before THOMPSON, J.P., and O'BRIEN, JOY and ALTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (De Lury, J.), rendered August 26, 1991, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth 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.
On October 4, 1990, at approximately 11:00 A.M., an unidentified woman walked into the 83rd Precinct and advised Police Officer Raymond Jeszeck that a black man whose name was thought to be "Larry" or "Lenny," wearing a beige Le Tigre shirt, jeans, and sneakers was selling narcotics on the northeast corner of Wilson and Schaefer Avenues.
Upon receiving that information, Officer Jeszeck went to the location. From a vantage point atop of a building overlooking Wilson and Schaefer Avenues, he observed the appellant, who generally fit the description that had previously been given to him. About 10 minutes later, a woman, who was riding a bicycle, approached the appellant and handed him some money. The appellant then went over to a telephone pole that was about 10 feet away, removed a brown paper bag from beneath a cover designed to conceal wires, and withdrew something from the paper bag. The appellant then handed the object to the woman on the bicycle. The woman then rode away.
Officer Jeszeck radioed a description of the woman to his backup team. The backup team intercepted the rider but failed to recover any narcotics, a fact that Jeszeck was advised of.
A few minutes later, another woman approached the appellant and handed him some money. Once again, the appellant went over to the telephone pole, retrieved the paper bag, removed an object, and touched hands with the second woman. That woman then walked away.
Officer Jeszeck and his backup team then drove to the corner of Wilson and Schaefer Avenues, where they detained the appellant, and placed him against the police vehicle. The appellant was patted for weapons while Jeszeck went to the telephone pole. Jeszeck then retrieved the bag, looked inside, and found 17 vials of crack cocaine. The appellant was then arrested and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Durham, 1491/2011.
...197 A.D.2d 710,appeal denied82 N.Y.2d 900People v. Goodwine, 177 A.D.2d 708,appeal denied79 N.Y.2d 920;see also People v. Meredith, 201 A.D.2d 674,appeal denied83 N.Y.2d 1005). Thus, since the police were justified in approaching, stopping and subsequently arresting defendant, the weapon re......
- People v. McGriff
-
People v. Robinson
... ... The officer also observed defendant remove an object from his waistband and place the 58 N.Y.S.3d 781object in a bush when he saw a marked patrol car approach, and then return the item to his waistband after the patrol car passed (see generally People v. Meredith, 201 A.D.2d 674, 674675, 607 N.Y.S.2d 979, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 1005, 616 N.Y.S.2d 487, 640 N.E.2d 155 ). The officer thereafter observed defendant remove the object from his waistband and hide it in the bush a second time when a second marked patrol car turned onto the street where defendant was ... ...
- People v. Meredith