LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

PEOPLE v POWELL Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: PEOPLE, State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>089_1063, Officers, Appellant, Barrel, Memorandum, Police Officer, Reason, Respondent, Request, Judge, Car Trunk, Officers Twice, Headlights, Spot, Hole, Fence, Dump, Support, Determination, Motion, Suppress, Girlfriend, Physical Evidence, Chief Judge Kaye, Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley Concur , ContentID: 120251461

Case Documents
1 1997-05-06 OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 125370
1 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 1 page.    CAUTION.    PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS A ONE PAGE CASE.
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
APPELLANT
BARREL
MEMORANDUM
POLICE OFFICER
REASON
DEFENDANT
RESPONDENT
REQUEST
JUDGE
CAR TRUNK
OFFICERS TWICE
HEADLIGHTS
SPOT
HOLE
FENCE
DUMP
SUPPORT
DETERMINATION
MOTION
SUPPRESS
GIRLFRIEND
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
CHIEF JUDGE KAYE
JUDGES TITONE
BELLACOSA
SMITH
LEVINE
CIPARICK
WESLEY CONCUR


  PEOPLE, & C., RESPONDENT, v. TYRONE POWELL, APPELLANT.

    89 N.Y.2d 1063, 681 N.E.2d 1278, 659 N.Y.S.2d 832 (1997).
    May 6, 1997

   1 No. 79 (1997 NY Int. 72)
   Decided May 6, 1997
     _________________________________________________________________

   This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
   publication in the New York Reports.

   Appellant.

   MEMORANDUM:

   The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

   In People v Hollman (79 NY2d 181, 191), we reaffirmed that police
   officers, acting upon an articulable reason, may approach an
   individual to request information concerning the individual's
   identity, destination or reason for being in an area and, "(i)f the
   individual is carrying something that would appear to a trained police
   officer to be unusual, the police officer can ask about that object."
   Defendant was observed by two Department of Sanitation peace officers
   in an area known for illegal dumping, with a 50 gallon cardboard
   barrel protruding from his car trunk. After defendant passed the
   officers twice, turned off his car's headlights, and backed the wrong
   way up a one-way street to a spot where there was a hole in a fence,
   the officers reasonably inquired of defendant whether he intended to
   dump the barrel, and what was in the barrel. Thus, there is support in
   the record for the Appellate Division's determination that the
   officers' request for information was justified. Defendant's motion to
   suppress his response (that he had killed his girlfriend, and her body
   was in the barrel) and the physical evidence was properly denied.

   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

   Order affirmed, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone,
   Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.

   Decided May 6, 1997

SNIPPETS:
  • PEOPLE, & C., RESPONDENT, v. TYRONE POWELL, APPELLANT.
  • This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
  • In People v Hollman, we reaffirmed that police officers, acting upon an articulable reason,
  • Defendant was observed by two Department of Sanitation peace officers in an area known for
  • After defendant passed the officers twice, turned off his car's headlights, and backed the
  • there is support in the record for the Appellate Division's determination that the officers'
  • Defendant's motion to suppress his response (that he had killed his girlfriend, and her body
  • Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.
  •    |