People v Diaz

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

People v Diaz 2018 NY Slip Op 34047(U) May 11, 2018 County Court, Orange County Docket Number: 2018-093 Judge: William L. DeProspo Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [* 1] COUNTY COURT: ORANGE COUNTY ST ATE OF NEW YORK -------------------------------- ------x THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, IND. NO. 2018-093 -against- DEIVI DIAZ, DECISION AND ORDER Defendant. -------------------------------------------x DePROSPO, W. Defendant is charged in the Indictment with the crimes of CRIMINAL POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE IN THE THIRD DEGREE, a class B felony, in violation of section 220.16(1) of the Penal Law of the State of New York; CRIMINAL POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE IN THE FOURTH DEGREE, a class C felony, in violation of section 220.09(1) of the Penal Law of the State of New York; and UNLAWFUL POSSESSIONOF MARIHUANA, a violation, in violation of section 221.05 of the Penal Law of the State of New York. Defendant has moved for certain pre-trial relief on the consolidated indictments. The Court, having considered the following papers: -Defendant's notice of motion and affirmation, submitted by Christopher G. Berger, Esq.; -People's affirmations in response, submitted by Janine M. Kovacs, Esq., Assistant District Attorney, Orange County District Attorney's Office; -Grand Jury Minutes-Indictments-Voluntary Disclosure Forms; It is hereby ORDERED that the defendant's motion is decided in the following manner: 1 [* 2] MOTION TO INSPECT GRAND JURY MINUTES Defendant's motion is granted to the extent that the Court has reviewed the minutes of the Grand Jury in camera. The Court finds that release of the minutes is not necessary to the determination of this motion. The Court further finds that the indictment is based upon legally sufficient evidence and that the Grand Jury was properly instructed with respect to the applicable law. MOTION TO SUPPRESS PHYSICAL EVIDENCE Defendant's motion is granted to the extent that a hearing is hereby ordered pursuant to CPL Section 710.60(4) to determine the admissibility of any physical evidence seized. The defendant's moving papers are sufficient to warrant a hearing on the issue of suppression. People v. White, 137 AD3d 1311 (2 nd Dept., 2016). Further. defendant's motion seeking a Dunaway hearing to determine whether there was probable cause to effectuate his arrest is granted. People v. Mendoza, 82 NY2d 415, 429-430 (1993). MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS Defendant's motion is granted to the extent that a hearing is hereby ordered on the issue of the voluntariness of any statement made to law enforcement personnel. MOTION FOR BRADY MATERIAL Defendant's motion is granted to the extent that the District Attorney is directed to disclose to defendant any and all documents, materials and/or information, if any, required to be disclosed pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, 83 S.Ct. 1194 (1963). 2 [* 3] MOTION FOR A SANDOVAL HEARING Defendant's motion is granted to the extent that a hearing is hereby ordered which will be held immediately prior to trial to determine which, if any, bad acts or convictions may be used as impeachment in the event that the defendant elects to testify at trial. The District Attorney is further ordered to disclose, in accordance with CPL Section 240.43, any and all acts which he intends to use for purposes of impeaching defendant at trial. CONFERENCE/HEARING DATE This case is scheduled for conference on May 14, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. All parties are directed to appear. The above constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court. Dated: Goshen, New York May 11, 2018 ENTER TO: DAVID M HOOVLER. ORANGE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY Attorney for the People 255-285 Main St. Goshen, New York 10924 3 [* 4] Christopher G. Berger, Esq. Attorney for Defendant 6 McNamara Drive Campbell Hall, New York 10916 4

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.