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, etc., respondent, v. Maynard ARCHER, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lewis, J.), rendered February 3, 2004, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, possession of burglar's tools, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial (Grosso, J.), after a hearing (Demakos, J.H.O.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence since the evidence was obtained from a search incident to a lawful arrest (see People v. Parker, 306 A.D.2d 543, 761 N.Y.S.2d 850).
The trial court properly refused to charge the jury with trespass (see Penal Law § 140.05) as a lesser-included offense of burglary in the third degree (see Penal Law § 140.20), since no reasonable view of the evidence could lead one to conclude that the defendant, equipped with a burglar's tools, attempted an unlawful entry into the premises for an innocent, rather than a criminal, purpose (see CPL 300.50[1]; People v. Martin, 59 N.Y.2d 704, 463 N.Y.S.2d 419, 450 N.E.2d 225; People v. Rohena, 183 A.D.2d 859, 584 N.Y.S.2d 100).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
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: January 17, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)