TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Davis

The People of the State of New York v. Allen Davis

People v. Davis, 480 N.E.2d 339 (N.Y. 1985)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 2, 1985
Citations
480 N.E.2d 33964 N.Y.2d 1143490 N.Y.S.2d 7251985 N.Y. LEXIS 15855

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

*1144 On this appeal, it is argued that a police officer’s instruction to defendant to place a plastic bag in his possession on the ground, and the officer’s subsequent search of the bag, were unsupported by reasonable suspicion as a matter of law. Reasonable suspicion involves a mixed question of law and fact, which is beyond the review powers of this court if there is evidence adduced at the suppression hearing which supports the determination made by the courts below. (People v Harrison, 57 NY2d 470, 477.)

In this case, defendant was a passenger upon a moped which was operated without license plates, at 2:30 a.m., in a high crime area. Neither defendant nor his companion could produce any form of identification. Upon the officer’s inquiry as to what was in a plastic bag in his possession, defendant removed a pair of pants from the bag, impliedly suggesting that the bag contained nothing else, whereupon a bulge appeared in the bottom of the bag from a heavy object within. The officer perceived the situation to be dangerous, and ordered defendant to place the bag on the ground. In the bag the officer discovered a .45 caliber weapon. We are presented with affirmed factual findings that the officer’s conduct was based upon reasonable suspicion under the circumstances, and that the officer perceived the situation to be a dangerous one. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the officer’s conduct was unwarranted as a matter of law.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 17 cases

View all citing references →
1985: 31986: 31987: 11988: 11989: 21991: 11992: 12007: 12008: 12012: 12013: 12015: 119852026peak 1985 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. People v. Hill171 A.D.2d 1017 (1991) · Dissent
  2. People v. Torres543 N.E.2d 61 (N.Y. 1989) · Dissent
  3. People v. Roth487 N.E.2d 270 (N.Y. 1985)
  4. People v. Lewis123 A.D.2d 716 (1986)
  5. People v. Shuler98 A.D.3d 695 (2012)
  6. People v. Shackleford57 A.D.3d 578 (2008)

Most recent

  1. People v. Graham134 A.D.3d 1047 (2015)
  2. In re Jakwon R.110 A.D.3d 723 (2013)
  3. People v. Shuler98 A.D.3d 695 (2012)
  4. People v. Shackleford57 A.D.3d 578 (2008)
  5. People v. Holmes36 A.D.3d 714 (2007)
  6. People v. Broome187 A.D.2d 949 (1992)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
People v. Harrison, 443 N.E.2d 447 (N.Y. 1982) 209

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list