From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 15, 1990
166 A.D.2d 604 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

October 15, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fisher, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that his constitutional rights were violated by a forcible stop, search and seizure which he alleges was improper. He argues, therefore, that the gun recovered as a result of that procedure should have been suppressed as the fruit of an illegal search. We disagree. The determination of the hearing court, with its advantage of having seen and heard the witnesses, must be accorded great weight (see, People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761). Issues of credibility are primarily for the hearing court, and its findings should be upheld unless they are clearly erroneous (see, People v. Armstead, 98 A.D.2d 726; People v. Africk, 107 A.D.2d 700, 701-702). Here, the officers obtained information about a violent crime involving guns from a citizen witness who volunteered his name and address and who the police believed to be telling the truth. Therefore, when the officers observed four individuals who substantially matched the descriptions given by the witness and who were two blocks away from the scene of the purported crime, within 30-35 minutes of the commission of the crime, they had probable cause to suspect that these individuals had committed the crime. They were therefore justified in "intruding upon the individual's liberty in the greatest possible way" (People v. Finlayson, 76 A.D.2d 670, 675). The officers were entitled to frisk the defendant in the reasonable belief that they were in danger of physical injury by virtue of the defendant being armed (see, CPL 140.50; Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1; People v. Benjamin, 51 N.Y.2d 267; People v. Finlayson, supra, at 670). Moreover, once a gun was recovered, there was probable cause to believe that the other individuals may have also possessed weapons or were guilty of constructively possessing that weapon. Accordingly, the denial of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress the gun recovered as a result of that search was proper. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 15, 1990
166 A.D.2d 604 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Davis

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MAURICE DAVIS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 15, 1990

Citations

166 A.D.2d 604 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
561 N.Y.S.2d 789

Citing Cases

People v. Wilson

A subsequent sweep through the back bedroom of the apartment revealed more drugs and drug paraphernalia as…

People v. Smith

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the police possessed probable…