People v. Ward

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ward

22 A.D.3d 368, 802 N.Y.S.2d 166

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

DecidedOctober 20, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 22 A.D.3d 368 (People v. Ward) 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. Ward, 22 A.D.3d 368, 802 N.Y.S.2d 166 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael J. Obus, J.), rendered February 3, 2003, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of burglary in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree and resisting arrest, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of five years, one year and one year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. When defendant gave highly suspicious answers to an officer’s lawful request for information about a loud crashing noise in the immediate vicinity, including answers that were inconsistent with the officer’s own observations, the encounter escalated to the point where the officer had a founded suspicion that criminality was afoot, which justified the officer in asking defendant whether he had any weapons on him (see People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210, 223 [1976]; People v McPherson, 286 AD2d 616 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 685 [2001]).

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

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael J. Obus, J.), rendered February 3, 2003, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of burglary in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree and resisting arrest, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of five years, one year and one year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. When defendant gave highly suspicious answers to an officer’s lawful request for information about a loud crashing noise in the immediate vicinity, including answers that were inconsistent with the officer’s own observations, the encounter escalated to the point where the officer had a founded suspicion that criminality was afoot, which justified the officer in asking defendant whether he had any weapons on him (see People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210, 223 [1976]; People v McPherson, 286 AD2d 616 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 685 [2001]).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.3d 368, 802 N.Y.S.2d 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ward-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack