Reset A A Font size: Print

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

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Telford WATSON, appellant.

Decided: February 22, 2005

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, STEPHEN G. CRANE, and PETER B. SKELOS, JJ. Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Barry Stendig of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano and Sharon Y. Brodt of counsel;  Annmarie Giblin on the brief), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), rendered June 10, 2002, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.   The appeal brings up for review the denial (Hollie, J.), after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

 Contrary to the defendant's contention, the police officer's testimony at the suppression hearing was credible.  “The factual findings and credibility determinations of a hearing court are entitled to great deference on appeal and will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record” (People v. Cameron, 6 A.D.3d 546, 775 N.Y.S.2d 63;  see People v. Chapman, 277 A.D.2d 392, 717 N.Y.S.2d 211;  People v. Johnson, 255 A.D.2d 456, 680 N.Y.S.2d 865).   The record supports the Supreme Court's determination to credit the police officer's testimony, which indicated that there was probable cause for both the initial stop and subsequent search of the defendant's vehicle (see People v. Robinson, 97 N.Y.2d 341, 741 N.Y.S.2d 147, 767 N.E.2d 638;  People v. Pierre, 8 A.D.3d 904, 905, 780 N.Y.S.2d 389;  see also People v. Morgan, 10 A.D.3d 369, 781 N.Y.S.2d 652).   Consequently, the Supreme Court properly denied suppression (see People v. Denson, 222 A.D.2d 691, 636 N.Y.S.2d 659).

Copied to clipboard