People v. Randazzo
| Decision Date | 15 October 1964 |
| Citation | 254 N.Y.S.2d 99,15 N.Y.2d 526,202 N.E.2d 549 |
| Parties | , 202 N.E.2d 549 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph John RANDAZZO, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
John R. Coughlin, Syracuse, for appellant.
Frank S. Hogan, Dist. Atty. (Joseph A. Phillips, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment affirmed. Defendant-appellant, as a parolee, was deprived of no constitutional rights by the search and seizure which was made under the circumstances of this case (People ex rel. Natoli v. Lewis, 287 N.Y. 478, 41 N.E.2d 62; Anderson v. Corall, 263 U.S. 193, 44 S.Ct. 43, 68 L.Ed. 247).
DESMOND, C. J., concurs solely on the ground that the search of the parolee's apartment was incidental to his arrest on a valid administrative warrant.
FULD, J., dissents in the following opinion.
If the search of the defendant's apartment leading to the seizure of narcotics is to be justified, it must be on the ground either (1) that a parolee has no right to the protection of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches or (2) that the search was incident to the defendant's arrest for violating his parole by consorting with a known criminal. I do not believe that it may be sanctioned on either ground.
Although in a certain sense, and for certain purposes, a paroled convict is regarded as still being 'a prisoner' and 'in legal custody' (see People ex rel. Natoli v. Lewis, 287 N.Y. 478, 481-482, 41 N.E.2d 62, 64; Anderson v. Corall, 263 U.S. 193, 196, 44 S.Ct. 43), I cannot believe that one's status as a parolee deprives him of all right to the protection of the Fourth Amendment. The beneficent purposes sought to be served by parole would, to a large extent, be destroyed if a parolee's home could be searched at any time, without probable or reasonable grounds, on the theory that the parolee is living in an enlarged prison cell. And, certainly, the simple blanket permission which a convict, as a condition to obtaining parole, gives the Parole Officer to 'visit' him at his residence or place of employment may not be read as a waiver of constitutional guarantees or a consent to conduct a general, exploratory search of these places whenever the officer pleases.
The rule which allows a contemporaneous search, without a search warrant, as incidental to a person's lawful arrest is justified by the need to seize weapons or the fruits of, or the implements used to commit, the crime or violation involved. (See, e. g., Preston v. United States, 376 U.S. 364, 367, 84 S.Ct. 881, 11 L.Ed.2d 777.) In the present case, the Parole Officer was unquestionably...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Santos, GT-D
...indicated a reasonable suspicion that the undertaken search would reveal evidence of parole violations (People v. Randazzo, 15 N.Y.2d 526, 254 N.Y.S.2d 99, 202 N.E.2d 549 (information that parolee trafficked in narcotics); People v. Santos, 31 A.D.2d 508, 298 N.Y.S.2d 526, supra (informatio......
-
State v. Cullison
...A similar position was adopted in Jackson v. Bishop, D.C., 268 F.Supp. 804, 807, and dissent in People v. Randazzo, 15 N.Y.2d 526, 527, 254 N.Y.S.2d 99, 100, 202 N.E.2d 549, 550. Furthermore, Hernandez, supra, has not escaped criticism. See 18 Vanderbilt L.Rev. 754, The foregoing discloses ......
-
State v. Williams
...Langella, 41 Misc.2d 65, 244 N.Y.S.2d 802; People v. Santos, 25 N.Y.2d 976, 305 N.Y.S.2d 365, 252 N.E.2d 861; People v. Randazzo, 15 N.Y.2d 526, 254 N.Y.S.2d 99, 202 N.E.2d 549, cert. den. 381 U.S. 953, 85 S.Ct. 1810, 14 L.Ed.2d 725. Neither the Fourth Amendment nor comparable state constit......
-
People v. Ferguson
...a. Parole as an act of grace coupled with restrictions, and its acceptance as a waiver of rights. See: People v. Randazzo, 15 N.Y.2d 526, 254 N.Y.S.2d 99, 202 N.E.2d 549 (see dissent), People v. Way, 65 Misc.2d 865, 319 N.Y.S.2d 16, People v. Langella, 41 Misc.2d 65, 244 N.Y.S.2d 802, Peopl......