Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Luis GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (William C. Donnino, J. at hearing; Martin Marcus, J. at trial, plea and sentence), rendered April 4, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the first degree and seven counts of murder in the second degree, and also convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate prison term of life without parole, unanimously affirmed.
The motion court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress statements and physical evidence. Probable cause was established through a very lengthy chain of incriminating circumstances. While each piece of information, viewed singly, might have had an innocent explanation, the information provided probable cause when viewed as a whole (see People v. Bigelow, 66 N.Y.2d 417, 423, 497 N.Y.S.2d 630, 488 N.E.2d 451 [1985] ).
The court properly found that defendant's girlfriend had voluntarily consented to searches of her car and of the apartment in which she and defendant lived (see generally People v. Gonzalez, 39 N.Y.2d 122, 128-131, 383 N.Y.S.2d 215, 347 N.E.2d 575 [1976] ). There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations, which are supported by the record (see People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380 [1977] ).
The record establishes that defendant waived his present contention that the court improperly suspended deliberations of the non-sequestered jury for more than the statutorily mandated period of 24 hours (CPL 310.10[2] ).
We have considered and rejected defendant's hearsay argument, and we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: December 29, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)