People v. Sierra

• Decision Date: 14 June 1994
• Citation: 615 N.Y.S.2d 310,638 N.E.2d 955,83 N.Y.2d 928
• Parties: , 638 N.E.2d 955 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Rafael SIERRA, Appellant. The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James ROBBINS, Appellant.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 310

615 N.Y.S.2d 310

83 N.Y.2d 928, 638 N.E.2d 955

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Rafael SIERRA, Appellant.

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James ROBBINS, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

June 14, 1994.

[83 N.Y.2d 929] [638 N.E.2d 956] David B. Affler, New York City, and Philip L. Weinstein, for appellant in the first above-entitled action.

Robert M. Morgenthau, Dist. Atty. of New York County, New York City (David J. Mudd and Mark Dwyer, of counsel), for respondent in the first above-entitled action.

Elizabeth Manning, New York City, and Philip L. Weinstein, for appellant in the second above-entitled action.

Robert M. Morgenthau, Dist. Atty. of New York County, New York City (Ann P. Wyllie and Norman Barclay, of counsel), for respondent in the second above-entitled action.

OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division in People v. Sierra, 190 A.D.2d 202, 599 N.Y.S.2d 6, should be affirmed. The order of the Appellate Division in People v. Robbins, 196 A.D.2d 699, 601 N.Y.S.2d 617, should be reversed, defendant's motion to suppress granted, and the indictment dismissed.

At issue in both cases is solely the application of a well-settled principle: that a defendant's flight in response to an approach by the police, combined with other specific circumstances indicating that the suspect may be engaged in criminal activity, may give rise to reasonable suspicion, the necessary predicate for police pursuit. Whether the circumstances known to the police in a particular case give rise to reasonable suspicion is a mixed question of law and fact beyond our review unless there is no evidence in the record to support the determination of the lower courts. We conclude that in Sierra there was evidence in the record to support the determination of reasonable suspicion, and in Robbins there was not.

In Sierra, police officers patrolling a neighborhood of Washington Heights known to them as a "narcotics supermarket" for New Jersey residents, watched a man exit a parked vehicle with New Jersey license plates, walk toward defendant in response to defendant's calling out "over here, over here," and promptly turn and walk away upon spotting the police. These facts furnished an objective, credible reason to approach defendant. Defendant's refusal to approach the cruiser and his subsequent flight gave rise to reasonable suspicion that he was committing or was about to commit a drug-related...