From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cranmer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 1, 1990
167 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

November 1, 1990

Appeal from the County Court of Broome County (Monserrate, J.).


County Court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress certain evidence seized at his apartment pursuant to a search warrant. Even if it is accepted that defendant had standing to challenge the use of the seized property at trial (cf., People v. Wesley, 73 N.Y.2d 351; see, Horton v. California, 496 US ___, 110 S Ct 2301), his constitutional rights were, nevertheless, not violated by the seizure of items not specified in the warrant. The warrant was valid, the evidence was in plain view and its incriminatory nature was readily apparent (see, People v. Watson, 100 A.D.2d 452). There was also no abuse of discretion in allowing a witness to testify as an expert as to the victim's failure to make earlier disclosures (see, People v. Benjamin R., 103 A.D.2d 663).

Judgment affirmed. Kane, J.P., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Cranmer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 1, 1990
167 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Cranmer

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROBERT G. CRANMER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Nov 1, 1990

Citations

167 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

People v. Spencer

Nor, as defendant suggests, can the police conduct be viewed as an improper application of the plain view…

People v. Gibson

denied95 N.Y.2d 858, 714 N.Y.S.2d 9, 736 N.E.2d 870 [2000];People v. Carby, 198 A.D.2d 366, 366–367, 603…