People v Medina, 40 NY3d 1022 (2023)

2023 NY Slip Op 05963 [40 NY3d 1022]
November 21, 2023
Court of Appeals

[*1]

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
Victor Medina, Appellant.

Decided November 21, 2023

People v Medina, 209 AD3d 1059, affirmed.

{**40 NY3d at 1022} OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.{**40 NY3d at 1023}

Following a lawful traffic stop, an officer approached defendant’s vehicle and spoke to him through his open driver’s side window. The officer observed that defendant was sitting in an unnatural and contorted position, attempting to shield the right side of his body from the officer’s view. When the officer asked defendant where he was coming from, defendant provided inconsistent stories.

The issue on appeal, whether the officer’s conduct in subsequently requesting consent to search defendant’s car conformed with the standards set out in People v De Bour (40 NY2d 210 [1976]), presents a mixed question of law and fact and “our review is limited to whether there is evidence in the record supporting the lower courts’ determinations” (People v McIntosh, 96 NY2d 521, 524 [2001]). County Court found the officer’s testimony about defendant’s inconsistent statements and behavior credible and sufficient to demonstrate the necessary founded suspicion to request defendant’s consent to search the vehicle, and the Appellate Division affirmed (209 AD3d 1059 [3d Dept 2022]). The record supports these holdings (see People v Battaglia, 86 NY2d 755 [1995], citing People v Hollman, 79 NY2d 181, 191-192 [1992]). Defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Chief Judge Wilson and Judges Rivera, Garcia, Singas, Cannataro, Troutman and Halligan concur.

[*2]
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, in a memorandum.