People v. Stokes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Stokes

138 A.D.2d 939, 526 N.Y.S.2d 275, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2732

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

DecidedMarch 4, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 138 A.D.2d 939 (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, 138 A.D.2d 939, 526 N.Y.S.2d 275, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2732 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Even if the police properly stopped defendant for a traffic infraction, the information which they had did not justify the frisk which resulted in the discovery of cocaine on defendant’s person. At most the police knew that two days earlier a reliable informant had reported that drug dealing was occurring from the vehicle defendant had been driving and had just exited and that a handgun was in the vehicle. The only description of the people involved was that they were black males, and there was no information that a gun was on anyone’s person. Defendant was stopped after he had exited the vehicle, which was parked in a neighborhood some distance from the location the reliable informant had given. His conduct was not furtive, evasive, or threatening in any way, nor did the police observe any suspicious bulge in his clothing. The information the police had did not give them a reasonable basis for suspecting that defendant was armed and dangerous (see, People v Russ, 61 NY2d 693). Thus, the hearing court correctly suppressed the cocaine that was found. (Appeal from order of Monroe County Court, Connell, J.— suppression.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Davis, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Even if the police properly stopped defendant for a traffic infraction, the information which they had did not justify the frisk which resulted in the discovery of cocaine on defendant’s person. At most the police knew that two days earlier a reliable informant had reported that drug dealing was occurring from the vehicle defendant had been driving and had just exited and that a handgun was in the vehicle. The only description of the people involved was that they were black males, and there was no information that a gun was on anyone’s person. Defendant was stopped after he had exited the vehicle, which was parked in a neighborhood some distance from the location the reliable informant had given. His conduct was not furtive, evasive, or threatening in any way, nor did the police observe any suspicious bulge in his clothing. The information the police had did not give them a reasonable basis for suspecting that defendant was armed and dangerous (see, People v Russ, 61 NY2d 693). Thus, the hearing court correctly suppressed the cocaine that was found. (Appeal from order of Monroe County Court, Connell, J.— suppression.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 A.D.2d 939, 526 N.Y.S.2d 275, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2732, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stokes-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack