THE PEOPLE &C., APPELLANT, v. ALI MADERA, A/K/A ALBERTO RIVERA, RESPONDENT.
82 N.Y.2d 775, 624 N.E.2d 675, 604 N.Y.S.2d 538 (1993).
October 12, 1993
1 No. 283 SSM 38 (1993 NY Int. 188)
Decided October 12, 1993
_________________________________________________________________
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Submitted by Daniel S. Ratner, for Appellant.
Submitted by Steven J. Miraglia, for Respondent.
_________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
This People's appeal, allowed by permission of a dissenting Associate
Justice of the Appellate Division, implicates the issue whether police
officers reasonably believed that defendant was engaging in criminal
activity, justifying their pursuit and detention of him on a New York
City street. The trial court and the Appellate Division suppressed the
weapon ultimately recovered after the street chase and apprehension of
defendant.
The legal standard is not at issue, but only its application to
undisputed facts. Thus, the threshold question for this Court's review
is limited to whether the determination of the mixed question of law
and fact -- lack of reasonable suspicion of criminality to support the
police officers' belief for the pursuit action undertaken -- is
supported by this record (see, People v Harrison, 57 NY2d 470, 477).
Since it is, this Court's review is concluded and the order of the
Appellate Division must be affirmed.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules, order
affirmed, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone,
Hancock, Bellacosa, Smith and Levine concur.
SNIPPETS:
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
for Respondent.
This People's appeal, allowed by permission of a dissenting Associate Justice of the
The trial court and the Appellate Division suppressed the weapon ultimately recovered after
The legal standard is not at issue, but only its application to undisputed facts.
Thus, the threshold question for this Court's review is limited to whether the determination
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules, order affirmed, in a
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Bellacosa, Smith and Levine concur.
|
