People v. Scalegnio

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Scalegnio

199 N.E.2d 509, 14 N.Y.2d 744, 250 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1964 N.Y. LEXIS 1164

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 7, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 199 N.E.2d 509 (People v. Scalegnio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Scalegnio, 199 N.E.2d 509, 14 N.Y.2d 744, 250 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1964 N.Y. LEXIS 1164 (N.Y. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of Appellate Term reversed and motion to suppress granted (see People v. Caliente, 12 N Y 2d 89).

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan. Judge Dye dissents and votes to affirm in the following memorandum: When we take into consideration that, shortly before the officer lawfully stopped defendant’s automobile for a traffic violation, he had observed defendant make contact with a known drug pusher under suspicious circumstances, it was not unreasonable for the officer to believe that defendant was committing the crime of possession of narcotics in his presence. This being so, probable cause existed for the arrest of defendant without a warrant and the officer was justified in seizing what appeared to be a package of marijuana lying in plain sight in the automobile.

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

Order of Appellate Term reversed and motion to suppress granted (see People v. Caliente, 12 N Y 2d 89).

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan. Judge Dye dissents and votes to affirm in the following memorandum: When we take into consideration that, shortly before the officer lawfully stopped defendant’s automobile for a traffic violation, he had observed defendant make contact with a known drug pusher under suspicious circumstances, it was not unreasonable for the officer to believe that defendant was committing the crime of possession of narcotics in his presence. This being so, probable cause existed for the arrest of defendant without a warrant and the officer was justified in seizing what appeared to be a package of marijuana lying in plain sight in the automobile.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 N.E.2d 509, 14 N.Y.2d 744, 250 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1964 N.Y. LEXIS 1164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-scalegnio-ny-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack