People v. Watson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Watson

48 A.D.2d 815, 370 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10017

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

DecidedJune 26, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 48 A.D.2d 815 (People v. Watson) 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. Watson, 48 A.D.2d 815, 370 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10017 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered February 8, 1973, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of attempted possession of a weapon as a felony, unanimously reversed, on the law, the defendant’s motion to suppress granted and the indictment dismissed. Defendant’s motion to suppress the gun found in his possession as the result of a "frisk”, was denied after a hearing. The sole issue on this appeal is the constitutionality of that "frisk”. Study of the record discloses that even apart from any issue of credibility, there was no justification for a frisk. The mere observance of a "sagging” pocket absent other "suspicious” circumstances is not enough. With cqmmendable candor, the District Attorney concedes that there was insufficient justification for a frisk of the defendant and that the gun found as a result of the frisk must, therefore, be suppressed. Concur—Markewich, J. P., Lupiano, Tilzer, Lane and Lynch, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered February 8, 1973, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of attempted possession of a weapon as a felony, unanimously reversed, on the law, the defendant’s motion to suppress granted and the indictment dismissed. Defendant’s motion to suppress the gun found in his possession as the result of a "frisk”, was denied after a hearing. The sole issue on this appeal is the constitutionality of that "frisk”. Study of the record discloses that even apart from any issue of credibility, there was no justification for a frisk. The mere observance of a "sagging” pocket absent other "suspicious” circumstances is not enough. With cqmmendable candor, the District Attorney concedes that there was insufficient justification for a frisk of the defendant and that the gun found as a result of the frisk must, therefore, be suppressed. Concur—Markewich, J. P., Lupiano, Tilzer, Lane and Lynch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 815, 370 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10017, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-watson-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack