People v. Burpee
This text of 175 A.D.2d 585 (People v. Burpee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
— Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, motion granted and indictment dismissed. Memorandum: The police stopped defendant’s car based solely on an anonymous telephone tip that defendant possessed cocaine. Defendant was seized when the car was stopped (see, People v Sobotker, 43 NY2d 559). In order to justify the stop, [586]*586the police needed reasonable suspicion based on specific and articulable facts that defendant committed a crime (see, People v Ingle, 36 NY2d 413, 418-420). The anonymous tip provided neither reasonable suspicion (People v Sobotker, supra; People v La Pene, 40 NY2d 210, 222-224) nor probable cause (see, People v Bigelow, 66 NY2d 417, 423-424) to justify the stop. To the extent that the decision in Alabama v White (496 US 325) may be interpreted to support a contrary result, it is clear that this decision and the totality of circumstances test of Illinois v Gates (462 US 213) upon which it relied, is unacceptable as a matter of State constitutional law (see, People v Johnson, 66 NY2d 398, 406). Since the stop of defendant’s car was unlawful, the contraband seized must be suppressed (see, Wong Sun v United States, 371 US 471). (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Hannigan, J. — Criminal Possession Controlled Substance, 5th Degree.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Green, Pine, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
175 A.D.2d 585, 572 N.Y.S.2d 250, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10093, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-burpee-nyappdiv-1991.