Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of burglary in the second degree (Penal Law § 140.25 [2]) and petit larceny (Penal Law § 155.25). Defendant argues that his motion to suppress items seized from a vehicle he was driving should have been suppressed. We disagree. The People presented evidence at the suppression hearing that the vehicle was stopped because it had no front...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
