People v. Padilla

158 A.D.2d 368, 551 N.Y.S.2d 221, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1390

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: February 15, 1990
• Status: Published

Opinion

Police officers, responding to a radio report of an armed robbery, observed the defendant and another man, who met the general description of the perpetrators, running on a street near the location of the crime. The officers were justified in approaching with their hands on their revolvers, and in asking the two men to stop for questioning. (See, People v Livigni, 58 NY2d 894, affg 88 AD2d 386 [2d Dept 1982]; see also, People v Allen, 73 NY2d 378 [1989].) The suppression court credited the testimony of one of the officers that a box of bullets was visible in defendant’s coat pocket, notwithstanding the officer’s failure to include this information in notes or report. (See, People v Wright, 71 AD2d 585, 586 [1st Dept 1979], citing People v Cohen, 223 NY 406 [1918].) Thus, the hearing court correctly concluded that a subsequent frisk of the defendant, resulting in the seizure of a loaded .357 magnum revolver, a loaded .38 caliber revolver, 50 glassine envelopes of heroin, marihuana, jewelry and $430 was proper. (See, People v Smith, 143 AD2d 109, 110 [2d Dept 1988], lv denied 73 NY2d 790 [1988]; People v Kramer, 132 AD2d 572 [2d Dept 1987].)

Statements made by defendant following his arrest and after being given Miranda warnings were also admissible. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Milonas, Smith and Rubin, JJ.