People v. Dean
| Citation | 79 A.D.2d 555,433 N.Y.S.2d 803 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Ruby DEAN, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 11 December 1980 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
D. H. Steiner, New York City, for appellant.
J. Goffman, New York City, for defendant-respondent.
Before KUPFERMAN, J. P., and BIRNS, SILVERMAN, BLOOM and CARRO, JJ.
Order of the Supreme Court, New York County entered February 5, 1979, suppressing physical evidence and order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Lang, J.) entered May 1, 1980, dismissing the indictment, both unanimously reversed on the law, and on the facts the motion to suppress physical evidence denied, the indictment reinstated and the matter remanded for further proceedings.
The facts in this case are substantially undisputed. Officers Murray and Kaczoroski were assigned to radio motor patrol on October 4, 1978. At about 8:45 that morning they were in a coffee shop at 150th Street and Eighth Avenue when they were approached by a male with a full grown beard who was known by sight to Officer Murray and with whom he had exchanged pleasantries on a number of occasions. The man informed the officers that a woman across the street, wearing a brown sweater, had a gun which he had seen in her handbag. At about the same time he pointed out the defendant as the person referred to by him. While the name of the informant was then unknown to both officers, Officer Kaczoroski obtained it then or later. However, by reason of an objection sustained by the Hearing Court, he was prevented from putting the name of the informant on the record.
The officers then approached defendant. Murray, who was in the lead, unlocked his holster and placed his hand on his gun without drawing it. Koczoroski remained five feet to his rear, with gun drawn for the purpose of covering Murray. When Murray reached the defendant he said to her, . As Murray reached for the pocketbook, defendant handed it to him. . In the bag Murray found a box of shells. He then looked at defendant and noticed a bulge in her waistband. He put his hand on the bulge and felt a revolver. He removed the revolver and placed defendant under arrest.
The Hearing Court granted the motion to suppress, concluding that there was an insufficient basis for the reasonable suspicion leading to the "stop and pat down". We disagree.
The complex nature, of urban society, with its propensity to serve as a breeding ground for crime, has focused...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Alba
-
People v. Russ
...De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210 [386 N.Y.S.2d 375, 352 N.E.2d 562] ). Here, the intrusion was, in the circumstances, minimal." (People v. Dean, 79 A.D.2d 555, 556, 433 N.Y.S.2d 803.) "Reasonableness is the touchstone by which police conduct is measured under the Fourth Amendment. (Cady v. Dombrowski......
-
People v. Saunders
...facts upon which the enforcement officer relied, in light of his knowledge and experience' " [citations omitted] ( People v. Dean, 79 A.D.2d 555, 556, 433 N.Y.S.2d 803 [First Dept., 1980]; see, also, People v. Alba, 81 A.D.2d 345, 440 N.Y.S.2d 230 [First Dept., 1981] The United States Supre......
-
Bozer v. Higgins
...Court addressed the issue of suppressing evidence obtained during a courthouse magnetometer search. That Court citing People v. Dean, 79 A.D.2d 555, 433 N.Y.S.2d 803 and People v. Price, 54 N.Y.2d 557, 446 N.Y.S.2d 906, 431 N.E.2d 267 applied the applicable balancing of interest test and fo......