People v. Price

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Price

49 A.D.3d 330, 853 N.Y.2d 326

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

DecidedMarch 11, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.3d 330 (People v. Price) 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. Price, 49 A.D.3d 330, 853 N.Y.2d 326 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations, which are supported by the record (see People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761 [1977]). The officer had reasonable suspicion to frisk defendant during a lawful traffic stop, where the officer observed a large bulge in defendant’s pocket and defendant repeatedly disregarded the officer’s requests that he keep his hands away from the bulge (see People v Mims, 32 AD3d 800 [2006]; People v Fludd, 20 AD3d 351 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 852 [2005]; see also People v Moret, 240 AD2d 321 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 908 [1997]). Defendant’s hand movements with regard to the bulge were not innocuous, and they caused the officer to have a reasonable fear that defendant was preparing to draw a weapon.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman and Nardelli, JJ.

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

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations, which are supported by the record (see People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761 [1977]). The officer had reasonable suspicion to frisk defendant during a lawful traffic stop, where the officer observed a large bulge in defendant’s pocket and defendant repeatedly disregarded the officer’s requests that he keep his hands away from the bulge (see People v Mims, 32 AD3d 800 [2006]; People v Fludd, 20 AD3d 351 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 852 [2005]; see also People v Moret, 240 AD2d 321 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 908 [1997]). Defendant’s hand movements with regard to the bulge were not innocuous, and they caused the officer to have a reasonable fear that defendant was preparing to draw a weapon.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 330, 853 N.Y.2d 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-price-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack