People v Wisniewski
2017 NY Slip Op 00844 [147 AD3d 1388]
February 3, 2017
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
As corrected through Wednesday, March 29, 2017


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Julie R.Wisniewski, Appellant.

Lipsitz Green Scime Cambria LLP, Buffalo (Erin E. McCampbell of counsel), fordefendant-appellant.

Joseph V. Cardone, District Attorney, Albion (Katherine Bogan of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Orleans County Court (James P. Punch, J.), rendered August17, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of driving while intoxicated, aclass D felony, and driving while ability impaired.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting her upon a jury verdict of drivingwhile intoxicated (Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1192 [2]; 1193 [1] [c] [ii]) anddriving while ability impaired (§ 1192 [1]), defendant contends that County Courterred in denying her motion to suppress evidence arising from the allegedly improper stop of hervehicle. We reject that contention. The police may stop a vehicle "when there exists at least areasonable suspicion that the driver or occupants of the vehicle have committed, are committing,or are about to commit a crime" (Peoplev Robinson, 122 AD3d 1282, 1283 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Weconclude that the police had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant's vehicle based on thecontents of the 911 call from an identified citizen informant (see People v Argyris, 24 NY3d 1138, 1140-1141 [2014], reargdenied 24 NY3d 1211 [2015], cert denied 577 US &mdash, 136 S Ct 793 [2016]; People v Torres, 125 AD3d 1481,1482 [2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 1172 [2015]; People v Van Every, 1 AD3d 977, 978-979 [2003], lvdenied 1 NY3d 602 [2004]). The evidence in the record establishes that the informationprovided by the identified citizen informant "was reliable under the totality of the circumstances,satisfied the two-pronged Aguilar-Spinelli test for the reliability of hearsay tips in thisparticular context and contained sufficient information about" defendant's commission of thecrime of driving while intoxicated (Argyris, 24 NY3d at 1140-1141; see Torres,125 AD3d at 1482). Present—Whalen, P.J., Centra, Lindley, NeMoyer and Troutman,JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.