People v. Weishaupt
Decision Date | 12 June 2014 |
Citation | 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 04259,987 N.Y.S.2d 493,118 A.D.3d 1100 |
Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Richard WEISHAUPT Jr., Appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
118 A.D.3d 1100
987 N.Y.S.2d 493
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 04259
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Richard WEISHAUPT Jr., Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
June 12, 2014.
Andrew Kossover, Public Defender, Kingston (Michael K. Gould of counsel), for appellant.
[987 N.Y.S.2d 494]
D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Paul DerOhannesian of counsel), for respondent.
Before: PETERS, P.J., STEIN, McCARTHY and EGAN JR., JJ.
McCARTHY, J.
Appeals from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered August 20, 2010, (1) upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of burglary in the third degree, petit larceny and endangering the welfare of a child, and (2) convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of making an apparently sworn false statement in the first degree.
Police officer Travis Nissen received a dispatch call regarding a suspicious black sport utility vehicle (hereinafter SUV) towing an empty trailer near a dirt access road leading to private property. Nissen responded to the area but did not see an SUV or any suspicious activity. Soon after he left, he received a call from another officer indicating that the black SUV was heading back to the main road near the access road with a loaded trailer. Nissen headed back in the direction of the access road. He observed a black SUV with a trailer full of chairs. The SUV was missing a front license plate and the trailer had no license plate. Nissen stopped the vehicle, which was driven by defendant and occupied by his teenaged son. Upon questioning, defendant could not produce a driver's license or vehicle registration, denied being on the subject property, and stated that the chairs belonged to him and came from his property, but he could not explain why the vehicle and trailer were muddy and wet. Defendant agreed to go to the police station for questioning. Nissen drove him there in a police car.
At the station, a detective read defendant his Miranda rights, which defendant waived. After about 10 minutes of questioning, the detective went to the SUV, observed the lack of a plate on the trailer, the missing front license plate on the SUV, 36 chairs on the trailer, and dirt and mud on the SUV and trailer. The detective then went on the access road to the subject property, where he observed tire tracks that allegedly matched the tires on the trailer. Additionally, he observed fresh muddy footprints along a path and inside a building. That building also contained chairs that matched the ones on the trailer. Upon returning to the station, the detective asked defendant for his sneakers and defendant gave them to him.
In December 2008, defendant was charged in an indictment with burglary in the third degree, petit larceny and endangering the welfare of a child. In September 2009, he was charged in a separate indictment with making an apparently sworn false statement in the first degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree. Following a hearing on defendant's motion to suppress his statements and any physical evidence seized from him, County Court denied the motion. After a trial on the December 2008 indictment, a jury found him guilty of all counts. Defendant then pleaded guilty to making an apparently sworn false statement in the first degree in satisfaction of the September 2009 indictment, on the condition that his sentence run concurrently...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Rodriguez
... ... Ultimately, the "[f]actual determinations of the suppression court are entitled to great weight and will not be overturned unless clearly contrary to the evidence, taking into consideration the court's credibility determinations" ( People v. Weishaupt, 118 A.D.3d 1100, 1102, 987 N.Y.S.2d 493 [2014] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see People v. Rudolph, 170 A.D.3d 1258, 1259, 95 N.Y.S.3d 629 [2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 937, 109 N.Y.S.3d 724, 133 N.E.3d 427 [2019] ).The evidence at the suppression hearing established that, on ... ...
-
People v. Hightower
..."Police may validly stop a vehicle based on probable cause that the driver committed a traffic violation" ( People v. Weishaupt, 118 A.D.3d 1100, 1102, 987 N.Y.S.2d 493 [2014] [citations omitted]; see People v. Issac, 107 A.D.3d 1055, 1057, 968 N.Y.S.2d 631 [2013] ). "[P]robable cause exist......
-
People v. Rasul
...regardless of the [detaining] officer's underlying motivation or desire to conduct another investigation” (People v. Weishaupt, 118 A.D.3d 1100, 1102, 987 N.Y.S.2d 493 [2014] ; see People v. Cuffie, 109 A.D.3d 1200, 1201, 972 N.Y.S.2d 383 [2013], lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 1087, 981 N.Y.S.2d 673,......
-
People v. Rasul
...regardless of the [detaining] officer's underlying motivation or desire to conduct another investigation” ( People v. Weishaupt, 118 A.D.3d 1100, 1102, 987 N.Y.S.2d 493 [2014]; see People v. Cuffie, 109 A.D.3d 1200, 1201, 972 N.Y.S.2d 383 [2013], lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 1087, 981 N.Y.S.2d 673,......