| People v Hobson |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 07987 [111 AD3d 958] |
| November 27, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Fitzroy Hobson, Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Sholom J.Twersky, and Brooke T. Mickelson of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, KingsCounty (Dowling, J.), rendered June 29, 2010, convicting him of criminal possession of aweapon in the second degree and unlawful possession of marijuana, upon a jury verdict,and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing(Kamins, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppressphysical evidence.
Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contentions that the testimony of the police officers at thesuppression hearing was tailored to establish a sufficient factual predicate for the policeaction leading to the recovery of the gun and marijuana from his person, and that thehearing court erred in crediting the officers' testimony, is without merit. The credibilitydeterminations of a hearing court following a suppression hearing are accorded greatdeference on appeal, and will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record(see People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761 [1977]; People v Wilson, 96 AD3d980, 981 [2012]; People vMarinus, 90 AD3d 677 [2011]). Here, the record supports the Supreme Court'sdetermination to credit the officers' testimony. Contrary to the defendant's contention, thetestimony was not incredible, patently tailored to nullify constitutional objections, orotherwise unworthy of belief (see People v Condon, 100 AD3d 920 [2012]; People v McClendon, 92AD3d 959, 960 [2012]; People v Anderson, 91 AD3d 789 [2012]; People v Johnson, 83 AD3d733, 734 [2011]; People vGlenn, 53 AD3d 622, 623-624 [2008]). Rivera, J.P., Angiolillo, Hall andCohen, JJ., concur.