People v. Singletary

Dec 13, 2017
2016-06044
Versions:

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant‘s contention, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence. A vehicle may be searched without a warrant pursuant to the “automobile exception” if law enforcement officials have probable cause to believe that the vehicle “contains contraband, evidence of [a] crime, a weapon or some means of escape” (People v. Blasich, 73 NY2d 673, 678 [1989]; see People v. Galak, 81 NY2d 463, 467 [1993]). Here, the officers had probable cause to search the defendant‘s vehicle without a warrant because, upon making a valid traffic stop (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1163 [d]), the officers smelled what they identified, with the aid of experience and training, as a strong odor of marijuana emanating from inside the vehicle (see United States v. Ross, 456 US 798, 825 [1982]; People v. Chestnut, 36 NY2d 971, 973 [1975]; People v. McCaw, 137 AD3d 813, 815 [2016]; People v. Hurtado, 113 AD3d 411 [2014]; People v. Hughes, 68 AD3d 894, 895 [2009]; People v. Parris, 26 AD3d 393, 394 [2006]).

The defendant‘s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Rivera, J.P., Roman, LaSalle and Barros, JJ., concur.