Summary
concluding that "defendant was not in his 'place of business' when he stood on the street corner near his cab" without addressing issue of whether taxicab is place of business
Summary of this case from State v. LuttersOpinion
September 24, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel FitzGerald, J.).
Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. We see no reason to disturb the court's credibility determinations, which are supported by the record ( see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761). The court's instruction on the "place of business" exception of Penal Law § 265.02 (4) was correct. Defendant was not in his "place of business" when he stood on the street corner near his cab, ostensibly waiting to escort a customer to the cab ( People v. Figueroa, 207 A.D.2d 670; see also, People v. Powell, 54 N.Y.2d 524, 531; People v. Buckmire, 237 A.D.2d 151, 152, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 902).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion and find that the sentence was not based on any inappropriate criteria.
Concur — Lerner, P. J., Milonas, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.