[DOWNLOAD] "People State New York v. Peter Merola and Charles Mccole" by Supreme Court of New York # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: People State New York v. Peter Merola and Charles Mccole
• Author : Supreme Court of New York
• Release Date : January 07, 1968
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 72 KB

Description

[30 A.D.2d 963 Page 963] The testimony by the police officers at the hearing established that at 4:10 a.m. a "burglary in progress" call was received via police radio; the officers proceeded to the scene; one observed a broken window in a business establishment, heard an alarm sounding from within and saw a man running toward an automobile which had its headlights on and whose "motor apparently was running"; and the suspect vehicle proceeded to leave the scene but was subsequently halted by one of the police patrol cars. The officers approached the vehicle and observed a "large number" of coats in the back seat. The occupants of the vehicle did not respond to any questions. Respondents were placed under arrest and an immediate search of the automobile revealed additional coats. It is incontestable that no search of the automobile occurred when the officers observed the coats in open view unless they had no right to be in a position of attentiveness. "It has long been settled that objects falling in the< plain view of an officer who has a right to be in the position to have that view are subject to seizure and may be introduced in evidence" (Harris v. United States, 390 U.S. 234, 236; Davis v. United States, 327 F. 2d 301, 305). We are of the opinion that the initial detention of the automobile was lawful under either of the following theories: (1) It has been held that the police may stop an automobile to ascertain if the occupant has a driver's license and motor vehicle registration (People v. Hoffman, 24 A.D.2d 497; Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 401, subd. 4). (2) A police officer is authorized to stop a suspect "abroad in a public place whom he reasonably suspects * * * has committed * * * a felony" (Code Crim. Pro., § 180-a, subd.1; People v. Rivera, 14 N.Y.2d 441, cert. den. 379 U.S. 978). "The reasonableness in all the circumstances of the particular governmental invasion of a citizen's personal security" is the test to be applied when inquiring about Fourth Amendment violations (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 19; Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 176; People v. Morales, 22 N.Y.2d 55, 62-63; People v. Taggart, 20 N.Y.2d 335, remittitur amd. 21 N.Y.2d 729); and due weight must be accorded "to the specific reasonable inferences which he [the police officer] is entitled to draw from the facts in light of his experience"(Terry v. Ohio, supra, p. 27; see People v. Valentine, 17 N.Y.2d 128, 132; People v. Rivera, supra ; People v. Santiago, 13 N.Y.2d 326). We are of the view that, although there is a "troublesome line posed * * * between mere suspicion and probable cause" (Brinegar v. United States, supra, p. 176), the arresting officer in this particular situation and under these circumstances had (at the very least) a valid basis to "reasonably [30 A.D.2d 963 Page 964]

PDF Books Download "People State New York v. Peter Merola and Charles Mccole" Online ePub Kindle