People v. Mathis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mathis

118 A.D.2d 594, 499 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54453

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

DecidedMarch 3, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 118 A.D.2d 594 (People v. Mathis) 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. Mathis, 118 A.D.2d 594, 499 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54453 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a [595]*595judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Vogt, J.), rendered December 9, 1981, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The County Court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress certain drugs found on the front seat of the car in which defendant was sitting. Under the circumstances of this case, the officers had a reasonable suspicion that defendant had committed a crime, and therefore were authorized to forcibly stop and detain defendant (see, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210, 223). Accordingly, the drugs, which were in plain view on the front seat of the car, were properly admitted into evidence (see, People v Allende, 39 NY2d 474, 477). We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Lazer, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a [595]*595judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Vogt, J.), rendered December 9, 1981, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The County Court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress certain drugs found on the front seat of the car in which defendant was sitting. Under the circumstances of this case, the officers had a reasonable suspicion that defendant had committed a crime, and therefore were authorized to forcibly stop and detain defendant (see, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210, 223). Accordingly, the drugs, which were in plain view on the front seat of the car, were properly admitted into evidence (see, People v Allende, 39 NY2d 474, 477). We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Lazer, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 A.D.2d 594, 499 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mathis-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack