From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 22, 1990
157 A.D.2d 808 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

January 22, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sherman, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The airport search of the defendant's "carry-on luggage" by means of an X-ray machine was reasonable and constitutionally permissible given the evident danger to the public, the overwhelming governmental interest, and the minimal invasion into personal privacy (see, People v. Brown, 113 A.D.2d 893; see also, People v. Price, 54 N.Y.2d 557, 563-564; People v. Kuhn, 33 N.Y.2d 203, 209-210). Thus, the hearing court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to suppress the gun found in that luggage. Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Thompson and Brown, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Ross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 22, 1990
157 A.D.2d 808 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Ross

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES ROSS, Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 22, 1990

Citations

157 A.D.2d 808 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
550 N.Y.S.2d 410

Citing Cases

People v. Waring

Pursuant to this theory, a search of carry-on luggage may be justified even in the absence of any reasonable…

People v. Spalding

Without question, subjecting a person's bag to X-ray analysis constitutes a search. (See People v Waring, 174…