People v. Stokes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Stokes

57 A.D.2d 797, 394 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11971

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

DecidedMay 19, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 57 A.D.2d 797 (People v. Stokes) 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. Stokes, 57 A.D.2d 797, 394 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11971 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, dated November 19, 1976, granting defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence, is unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, and the motion to suppress is denied. Findings of fact inconsistent herewith are reversed. A police officer saw glassine envelopes fall from the vicinity of defendant’s hand to the ground close to defendant’s feet at a time when the nearest other person was five feet away from the defendant. The glassine envelopes were a "telltale sign of heroin.” (People v Corrado, 22 NY2d 308, 313; see, also, People v Alexander, 37 NY2d 202.) We find that the officer had probable cause to arrest for the commission of the crime of possession of narcotics. As incident to that arrest, the police officer had the right to frisk and search the defendant. Such frisk and search disclosed on the defendant’s person the weapon which is one of the objects sought to be suppressed. Concur — Birns, J. P., Silverman, Evans and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, dated November 19, 1976, granting defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence, is unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, and the motion to suppress is denied. Findings of fact inconsistent herewith are reversed. A police officer saw glassine envelopes fall from the vicinity of defendant’s hand to the ground close to defendant’s feet at a time when the nearest other person was five feet away from the defendant. The glassine envelopes were a "telltale sign of heroin.” (People v Corrado, 22 NY2d 308, 313; see, also, People v Alexander, 37 NY2d 202.) We find that the officer had probable cause to arrest for the commission of the crime of possession of narcotics. As incident to that arrest, the police officer had the right to frisk and search the defendant. Such frisk and search disclosed on the defendant’s person the weapon which is one of the objects sought to be suppressed. Concur — Birns, J. P., Silverman, Evans and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 797, 394 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11971, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stokes-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack