Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Robert EASON, Appellant.

Decided: May 29, 2001

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., DANIEL F. LUCIANO, HOWARD MILLER and SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ. Neal D. Futerfas, White Plains, N.Y., for appellant. Jeanine Pirro, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Dana M. Loiacono and Richard Longworth Hecht of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), rendered March 10, 1998, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (four counts) and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.   The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the hearing court erred in denying that branch of his motion which was to suppress physical evidence recovered from his car as the fruit of a pretextual stop is without merit.   The stop was validly based on the police officer's concededly correct knowledge that the registration for the vehicle had been suspended (see, Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89;  People v. Tavarez, 277 A.D.2d 260, 715 N.Y.S.2d 726;  People v. King, 266 A.D.2d 239, 697 N.Y.S.2d 325;  People v. Ortiz, 265 A.D.2d 579, 698 N.Y.S.2d 36;  People v. Henry, 258 A.D.2d 473, 685 N.Y.S.2d 100).   Thus, suppression of the physical evidence retrieved from the car was properly denied (see, People v. Tavarez, supra;  People v. King, supra).

Copied to clipboard