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. Gregory CHANDLER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Gregory Carro, J. on motion; Michael Ambrecht, J. at jury trial and sentence), rendered May 5, 2004, convicting defendant of grand larceny in the fourth degree (three counts), criminal mischief in the third degree and auto stripping in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied, without a hearing, defendant's motion to suppress physical evidence. Defendant's motion papers alleging that “at the time in question he had not done anything to give rise to probable cause for a stop much less a search” did not raise a factual issue to be resolved at a hearing (People v. Mendoza, 82 N.Y.2d 415, 427, 604 N.Y.S.2d 922, 624 N.E.2d 1017 [1993] ).
Defendant did not preserve his claim that the prosecutor's reference in his opening statement to a witness who ultimately did not testify was made in bad faith and unduly prejudiced him, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no basis for reversal (see People v. De Tore, 34 N.Y.2d 199, 207, 356 N.Y.S.2d 598, 313 N.E.2d 61 [1974], cert. denied sub nom. Wedra v. New York, 419 U.S. 1025, 95 S.Ct. 503, 42 L.Ed.2d 300 [1974] ).
Defendant's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his criminal mischief conviction is without merit (see People v. White, 29 A.D.3d 329, 813 N.Y.S.2d 718 [2006], lv. denied 7 N.Y.3d 796, 821 N.Y.S.2d 826, 854 N.E.2d 1290 [2006] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: February 06, 2007
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)