People v. Baker
| Decision Date | 25 June 1971 |
| Citation | 37 A.D.2d 139,322 N.Y.S.2d 374 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Stanford T. BAKER, Jr., Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Defendant was convicted of unlawful possession of a dangerous drug on the basis of evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant. By stipulation of the parties, the sole issue raised on appeal is whether probable cause existed for issuance of the search warrant prior to the arrival of the package to be seized at the premises to which the warrant was directed.
On January 9, 1970 a detective assigned to the Narcotics Division of the Buffalo Police Department appeared before a magistrate of the Buffalo City Court and made application for a warrant to search premises at 71 Arnold Street in that city for marijuana and a described package directed to the Arnold Street address, postmarked San Francisco and bearing defendant's name as return addressee. In his affidavit supporting the application the detective stated that, based upon information received from a named U.S. Customs agent and a named Postal Inspector, the package had been opened by a Customs employee during a routine inspection at the San Francisco Post Office, resealed and forwarded to Buffalo; that it had been reopened at the Post Office at Buffalo in his presence; that a compound in the package had been tested and found to be marijuana; that the package had been resealed and he was advised by postal authorities that it was scheduled for delivery on or about January 16, 1970; that his investigation revealed that on several occasions in the past mail had been accepted for defendant at 71 Arnold Street. The affiant further stated that, based on the foregoing reliable information and his personal knowledge 'there is probable cause to believe' that marijuana 'may be found' at the Arnold Street premises and he requested that the search might be made at any time due to the fact that evidence of narcotics can easily be destroyed or disposed of. The warrant, issued on the day of application, commanded a search of the Arnold Street premises and of any persons to whom marijuana may have been delivered.
On January 16 the detective proceeded to the premises, observed the delivery being made, executed the warrant 17 minutes later and confiscated the marijuana and package described in the warrant.
In denying the motion to suppress, the court concluded that there was probable cause to believe defendant was guilty of a continuing crime of possession which started when defendant mailed the package, continued while it was in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Glen
...Both convictions were unanimously affirmed by the Appellate Division on separate appeals (Baker judgment affd. with opn. 37 A.D.2d 139, 322 N.Y.S.2d 374, Glen judgment affd. 37 A.D.2d 692, 323 N.Y.S.2d 400). Both defendants raised the basis issues in unsuccessful pretrial motions to The con......
- People v. LaBelle
-
Gerardi v. State
... ... It has been approved in both New York and California and in at least one federal circuit. See People v. Baker, 37 ... A.D.2d 139, 322 N.Y.S.2d 374 (1971), affirmed sub nom., People v. Glen, 30 N.Y.2d 252, 331 N.Y.S.2d 656, 282 N.E.2d 614 (1972); ... ...
-
People v. Tobiass
...the time of the issuance of the warrant itself, did not negate the underlying showing of probable or reasonable cause. (People v. Baker, 37 A.D.2d 139, 322 N.Y.S.2d 374). Since there are no issues of fact which need be considered by the Court to establish probable cause for the issuance of ......