People v. Pridgen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pridgen

3 A.D.3d 393, 769 N.Y.S.2d 541, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 344

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

DecidedJanuary 15, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 A.D.3d 393 (People v. Pridgen) 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. Pridgen, 3 A.D.3d 393, 769 N.Y.S.2d 541, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 344 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dorothy Cropper, J), rendered October 25, 2001, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4½ to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. The police officer’s observation of defendant walking in a drug-prone neighborhood with a companion who was openly sniffing a bag of marijuana, provided the officer with a founded suspicion that criminal activity was afoot and justified a common-law inquiry of defendant as to whether he had any contraband. Defendant was not merely in proximity to unlawful activity, but was clearly accompanying a person who was engaged in such activity (see People v Curry, 213 AD2d 664 [1995], lv denied 85 NY2d 971 [1995]; compare People v Leveridge, 204 AD2d 246 [1994], [394]*394lv denied 84 NY2d 828 [1994]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Williams, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dorothy Cropper, J), rendered October 25, 2001, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4½ to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. The police officer’s observation of defendant walking in a drug-prone neighborhood with a companion who was openly sniffing a bag of marijuana, provided the officer with a founded suspicion that criminal activity was afoot and justified a common-law inquiry of defendant as to whether he had any contraband. Defendant was not merely in proximity to unlawful activity, but was clearly accompanying a person who was engaged in such activity (see People v Curry, 213 AD2d 664 [1995], lv denied 85 NY2d 971 [1995]; compare People v Leveridge, 204 AD2d 246 [1994], [394]*394lv denied 84 NY2d 828 [1994]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Williams, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.3d 393, 769 N.Y.S.2d 541, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 344, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pridgen-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack