People v. Crooks

122 A.D.3d 435, 995 N.Y.S.2d 73
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Crooks. Read the opinion of the Court — 129 A.D.3d 1207
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 13, 2014·No. 13448 1729/10·Published

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura A. Ward, J, at motion to controvert search warrant; Lewis Bart Stone, J., at suppression hearing; Melissa C. Jackson, J., at plea and sentencing), rendered December 16, 2013, convicting defendant of criminal possession of marijuana in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of five years’ probation, unanimously affirmed.

The police action in this case was lawful at all stages. A detective saw defendant, a United Parcel Service employee, taking boxes from a UPS facility and placing them in his privately owned vehicle. Based on reliable information from knowledgeable UPS supervisors (see Spinelli v United States, 393 US 410 [1969]; Aguilar v Texas, 378 US 108 [1964]), including information about UPS policies and defendant’s past pattern of behavior, and based on the absence of any other logical explanations for defendant’s conduct, the detective objectively (see Devenpeck v Alford, 543 US 146, 153 [2004]) had probable cause to believe either that defendant was stealing the boxes, or that he was picking up a shipment of illegal drugs. Moreover, the police acted reasonably in detaining defendant and moving the boxes to a location where they could be sniffed by a trained dog, resulting in the dog’s detection of drugs (see People v Devone, 15 NY3d 106 [2010]; People v Dunn, 77 NY2d 19 [1990], cert denied 501 US 1219 [1991]). The ensuing search warrant was lawfully issued, and it was not tainted by illegal police activity. The discrepancy between the warrant application and the affiant’s testimony at a hearing does not require suppression. We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments.

Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Tom, Renwick and Gische, JJ.

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

People v. Crooks, 122 A.D.3d 435, 995 N.Y.S.2d 73 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

122 A.D.3d 435 (People v. Crooks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Aguilar v. Texas
378 U.S. 108 (Supreme Court, 1964)
Spinelli v. United States
393 U.S. 410 (Supreme Court, 1969)
Devenpeck v. Alford
543 U.S. 146 (Supreme Court, 2004)
People v. Dunn
564 N.E.2d 1054 (New York Court of Appeals, 1990)
People v. Devone
931 N.E.2d 70 (New York Court of Appeals, 2010)