People v. Scott
| Decision Date | 23 December 1994 |
| Citation | 210 A.D.2d 920,621 N.Y.S.2d 260 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Croswell SCOTT, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Dudley Bertram, Rochester, for appellant.
William J. Fitzpatrick by Victoria Anthony, Syracuse, for respondent.
Before GREEN, J.P., and BALIO, WESLEY, CALLAHAN and DOERR, JJ.
There is no merit to the contention of defendant that the suppression court should have summarily granted that portion of his omnibus motion that sought suppression of physical evidence. The failure to submit opposing papers is not tantamount to an affirmative concession that the facts alleged by defendant are true. It was understood that the People would respond to defendant's motion at a later time, and the court did not err in conducting the hearing without the People's response (cf., People v. Trice, 101 A.D.2d 581, 586, 476 N.Y.S.2d 402, lv. denied 63 N.Y.2d 779, 481 N.Y.S.2d 1033, 470 N.E.2d 878).
Further, the court did not err in denying the motion to suppress. Defendant was lawfully stopped for a speeding violation and produced a driver's license that had expired more than a year before. A check on that license revealed 18 active suspensions. Defendant was arrested for aggravated unlicensed operation, handcuffed, frisked and placed in a police vehicle. A check on the driver's license produced by the other occupant of the vehicle revealed 25 active suspensions. Because neither occupant could drive the van from the scene, the State Police called for a tow truck and conducted an inventory search of the van. That search revealed drug paraphernalia: a 100-gram weight found in a briefcase in the rear of the van, thumbnail size glassine envelopes and a bottle of mannitol contained in paper bags underneath the driver's seat. Under the circumstances of this case, the State Police were justified in conducting that inventory search pursuant to the written manual issued by the Department of State Police (see, People v. Galak, 80 N.Y.2d 715, 594 N.Y.S.2d 689, 610 N.E.2d 362; People v. Gonzalez, 62 N.Y.2d 386, 477 N.Y.S.2d 103, 465 N.E.2d 823) and in conducting the strip search of defendant incidental to his arrest (see, People v. Phelps, 192 A.D.2d 483, 597 N.Y.S.2d 30, lv. dismissed 82 N.Y.2d 758, 603 N.Y.S.2d 1000, 624 N.E.2d 186; People v. Materon, 107 A.D.2d 408, 415-416, 487 N.Y.S.2d 334).
Defendant failed to preserve for review his contentions that the court erred in failing to instruct the jury that the People were required to prove that defendant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Bay Harbour Elec., Inc. v. County of Chautauqua
-
People v. Ross
...in conducting the inventory search of defendant's impounded vehicle in accordance with State Police procedures (see, People v. Scott, 210 A.D.2d 920, 921, 621 N.Y.S.2d 260, lv. denied 85 N.Y.2d 942, 627 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 651 N.E.2d 929; see also, People v. Clark, 210 A.D.2d 701, 620 N.Y.S.2d 1......
-
People v. Dillard
...(People v. Gadsden, 192 A.D.2d 1103, 597 N.Y.S.2d 256, lv. denied 82 N.Y.2d 718, 602 N.Y.S.2d 815, 622 N.E.2d 316; see, People v. Scott, 210 A.D.2d 920, 621 N.Y.S.2d 260). Defendant, who testified at the suppression hearing, did not allege that he was wearing his harness seat belt and, ther......
-
People v. Williams
...26 N.Y.3d 1042, 22 N.Y.S.3d 171, 43 N.E.3d 381 [2015] ; see Wilburn , 50 A.D.3d at 1618, 856 N.Y.S.2d 767 ; People v. Scott , 210 A.D.2d 920, 921, 621 N.Y.S.2d 260 [4th Dept. 1994], lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 942, 627 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 651 N.E.2d 929 [1995] ). The BPD policy provided, in relevant par......