People v. Church

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Church

188 A.D.2d 271, 590 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13518

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 1, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 188 A.D.2d 271 (People v. Church) 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.

Bluebook

People v. Church, 188 A.D.2d 271, 590 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13518 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Beal, J.), rendered May 22, 1990, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing him to a term of 3 years to life imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court properly denied the motion to suppress the physical evidence. The Amtrak investigator’s approach to defendant was justified as a request for information (People v Hollman, 79 NY2d 181). Defendant and his companions rushed into the concourse area of the train station and pushed their way into a ticket line; the companions instructed defendant to hurry to Washington, D.C. and to come right back; one of the companions produced a large amount of cash when purchasing the train ticket; and defendant trembled and [272]*272stuttered as he waited in line (People v D’Ambrosio, 28 AD2d 1130). These observations provided an "objective credible reason” to approach defendant and ask him nonthreatening questions. Since the officer’s inquiry was proper, defendant’s decision to toss away his gym bag constituted an abandonment of the property and a relinquishment of any expectation of privacy as to its contents (see, People v Castro, 162 AD2d 425, 426). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Wallach, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Beal, J.), rendered May 22, 1990, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing him to a term of 3 years to life imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court properly denied the motion to suppress the physical evidence. The Amtrak investigator’s approach to defendant was justified as a request for information (People v Hollman, 79 NY2d 181). Defendant and his companions rushed into the concourse area of the train station and pushed their way into a ticket line; the companions instructed defendant to hurry to Washington, D.C. and to come right back; one of the companions produced a large amount of cash when purchasing the train ticket; and defendant trembled and [272]*272stuttered as he waited in line (People v D’Ambrosio, 28 AD2d 1130). These observations provided an "objective credible reason” to approach defendant and ask him nonthreatening questions. Since the officer’s inquiry was proper, defendant’s decision to toss away his gym bag constituted an abandonment of the property and a relinquishment of any expectation of privacy as to its contents (see, People v Castro, 162 AD2d 425, 426). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Wallach, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 A.D.2d 271, 590 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13518, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-church-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack