From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 5, 1993
197 A.D.2d 365 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

October 5, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.).


Based on a livery cab driver's frantic hand signals pointing toward his passengers, the police had a right to question the passengers (see, People v. Charriz, 186 A.D.2d 495, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 761). High beams from a cab driver is not the only signal of criminal activity justifying a stop and inquiry. Moreover, the hysterical behavior of the driver who spoke in a foreign language and the furtive and evasive conduct of the defendant afforded a reasonable suspicion that the defendant was armed. Hence, the protective search for a weapon and the recovery of a .357 magnum with hollow point rounds by unzipping defendant's jacket was permissible (see, People v. Robinson, 125 A.D.2d 259, appeal dismissed 69 N.Y.2d 1014).

Accordingly, the motion to suppress was properly denied.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ross, Asch and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 5, 1993
197 A.D.2d 365 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Hampton

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANDRE HAMPTON…

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

Date published: Oct 5, 1993

Citations

197 A.D.2d 365 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
602 N.Y.S.2d 133

Citing Cases

People v. Wilson

The evidence adduced at the suppression hearing thus establishes that the officer had a reasonable suspicion…

People v. Thomas

) Moreover, no distress signal of any type was observed by the police prior to the stop (a circumstance that…