| People v Souris |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 09807 [46 AD3d 711] |
| December 11, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Panagiotis Souris, Also Known as Peter Souris,Appellant. |
—[*1] Janet DiFiore, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (William C. Milaccio, RichardLongworth Hecht, and Anthony J. Servino of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Adler,J.), rendered December 6, 2002, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substancein the third degree and failure to wear a safety belt in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law§ 1229-c (3), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for reviewthe denial, after a hearing (Smith, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion whichwas to suppress physical evidence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The credibility determinations of a hearing court are accorded great deference on appeal, andwill not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see People v Umadat, 29 AD3d830 [2006]; People v Cameron,6 AD3d 546 [2004]; People v Jakins, 277 AD2d 328 [2000]). The record supportsthe hearing court's determination to credit the testimony of a state trooper that he was able toobserve that the defendant was not wearing a safety belt in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law§ 1229-c (3) (see People vUmadat, 29 AD3d 830 [2006]; People v James, 19 AD3d 617, 618 [2005]). This observation, asdistinguished from mere pretext (see People v David, 223 AD2d 551 [1996]; People vSmith, 181 AD2d 802, 803 [1992]), justified the trooper's stop of the vehicle (see Whrenv United States, 517 US 806, 810 [1996]; People v Robinson, 97 NY2d 341, 349[2001]; People v Robinson, 38AD3d 572, 573 [2007]). Accordingly, the hearing court properly denied that branch of thedefendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Florioand Dillon, JJ., concur.