People v. Davis
| Decision Date | 11 October 1977 |
| Citation | 398 N.Y.S.2d 366,59 A.D.2d 722 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. William DAVIS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Aaron Nussbaum, Brooklyn, for appellant.
Eugene Gold, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Michael J. Halberstam, Brooklyn, of counsel), for respondent.
Before DAMIANI, J. P., SHAPIRO, MOLLEN and O'CONNOR, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered February 3, 1977, convicting him of attempted bribery in the second degree and attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal also brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of defendant's motion to suppress physical evidence.
Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, motion to suppress granted, the conviction of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and the sentence imposed thereon, are reversed, and the count of the indictment upon which said conviction is based is dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed.
On December 20, 1974 three police officers assigned to a "street crime unit", in an unmarked police vehicle, were told by an "unknown" informant that "a male Black, approximately * * * six feet tall, wearing a long brown suede coat that appeared to be leather, was in possession of a gun * * * (and) had just left * * * (the) location." Four minutes later and three blocks away, the officers observed the defendant-appellant walking on the street. Since the defendant fit the vague description, he was forcibly stopped by the three police officers, with their guns drawn, and he was observed to throw an object onto the street. The object was recovered and proved to be a loaded revolver. While he was being driven to the precinct, the defendant allegedly attempted to bribe one of the arresting officers. The defendant moved to suppress the weapon as the fruit of an illegal search and seizure, but this motion was denied. He thereafter entered a plea of guilty to attempted bribery in the second degree and attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.
The judgment must be modified by reversing the conviction of attempted criminal possession of a weapon and dismissing the count of the indictment upon which said conviction is based, as the People fully, and with candor, concede. It is clear that when the defendant was forcibly stopped at gunpoint, predicated upon the vague physical description given by an "unknown" informant, he was subjected to an improper and unconstitutional seizure of his person (see People v. Figueroa, App.Div., 396 N.Y.S.2d 63 (dec. June 27, 1977); ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Wallgren
...a causal connection” to the illegal police conduct, as such act is considered attenuated and purged of any taint ( People v. Davis, 59 A.D.2d 722, 723, 398 N.Y.S.2d 366 [1977] ). Here, after defendant was arrested on the side of the road, he was driven to the station and processed. At the s......
-
In the Matter of Rauon G. (anonymous)
...car was an independent, voluntary act, sufficiently attenuated from the arrest so as to be purged of any taint ( see People v. Davis, 59 A.D.2d 722, 723, 398 N.Y.S.2d 366; People v. Puglisi, 51 A.D.2d 695, 695, 380 N.Y.S.2d 221; People v. Munger, 37 A.D.2d 950, 950, 326 N.Y.S.2d 212; see al......
- People v. Forte