| People v Pompey |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 05263 [63 AD3d 612] |
| June 25, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Anthony Pompey, Appellant. |
—[*1] Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Ellen Stanfield Friedman of counsel),for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered April 2, 2008,convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the seconddegree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing himto concurrent terms of seven years and three years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. The officers' detailed testimony,taken together with the particular patrol guide section received in evidence, was sufficient tosatisfy the People's initial burden of establishing that there was a standard policy regardinginventory searches, that the standard procedure was designed to meet the objectives justifyingsuch searches, and that the search of defendant's bag was in compliance with the establishedprocedure (see People v Johnson, 1 NY3d 252, 256 [2003]). In particular, the hearingevidence made it clear that the relevant aspects of the procedure at issue were standardized ratherthan discretionary. The People also established that the police made a proper inventory searchand not a search for incriminating evidence; we note that an officer continued and completed thesearch after another officer discovered a pistol. Furthermore, the officers compiled a properinventory list of the full contents of defendant's bag, notwithstanding that they listed contrabandand noncontraband items on different pages (compare People v Gomez, 50 [*2]AD3d 407, 409-410 [2008] [list limited to evidentiary items heldinsufficient]).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias,Nardelli, DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.