People v. Monroe’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of two counts each of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree ... and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.... Defendant contends that his arrest was not supported by probable cause and that County Court therefore erred in refusing to suppress statements made by defendant to the police, as well as physical evidence seized incident to his arrest. We reject that contention. Where hearsay information forms at least in part the basis for probable cause, the information must satisfy “ ‘the two-part Aguilar-Spinelli test requiring a showing that the informant is reliable and has a basis of knowledge for the information imparted’ ” (People v. Flowers, 59 A.D.3d 1141, 1142 [ 873 N.Y.S.2d 413 (2009) ]). Here, the police had probable cause to arrest defendant based on information imparted to the police by the confidential informant who purchased cocaine from defendant. With respect to the reliability requirement, the police verified the accuracy of the information provided by the confidential informant by monitoring the drug transactions (see People v. Glover, 23 A.D.3d 688, 689 [ 803 N.Y.S.2d 272 (2005) ], lv. denied 6 N.Y.3d 776 [ 811 N.Y.S.2d 343 , 844 N.E.2d 798 (2006) ]) and, with respect to the basis of knowledge requirement, the People established that the confidential informant participated in the drug transactions involving defendant (see People v. Ketcham, 93 ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Monroe v. Rabsatt