People v Echevarria (Carlos)

[*1] People v Echevarria (Carlos) 2014 NY Slip Op 51517(U) Decided on October 22, 2014 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on October 22, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Schoenfeld, J.P., Shulman, Ling-Cohan, JJ.
570239/12

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Carlos Echevarria, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Matthew A. Sciarrino, J.), rendered February 7, 2012, after a jury trial, convicting him of driving while impaired, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Matthew A. Sciarrino, J.), rendered February 7, 2012, affirmed.

Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations, which are supported by the record (see People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761 [1977]). The suppression court reasonably could find that the stop of defendant's vehicle was lawful based on the arresting officer's observations of its excessively tinted windows (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 375 [12-a],[b]), which he described as "a lot darker" than the legal threshold of 70% light transmissivity, and which caused the officer to run a license plate check on the vehicle to determine whether it was an unmarked police car (see People v Osborne, 158 AD2d 740 [3d Dept 1990], lv denied 75 NY2d 968 [1990]; see also People v Edwards, 222 AD2d 603, 604 [1995], lv denied 88 NY2d 984 [1996]; People v Cuevas, 203 AD2d 88, 99 [1994], lv denied 83 NY2d 909 [1994]; cf. People v Tompkins, 6 Misc 3d 30 [2004] [addressing the legal sufficiency of the People's proof at trial]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: October 22, 2014