20 Cited authorities

  1. Terry v. Ohio

    392 U.S. 1 (1968)   Cited 34,217 times   73 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a police officer who has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity may conduct a brief investigative stop
  2. Michigan v. Long

    463 U.S. 1032 (1983)   Cited 3,284 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the search of the passenger compartment of an automobile . . . is permissible if the police officer possesses a reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts which, taken together with the rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant the officers in believing that the suspect is dangerous and the suspect may gain immediate control of weapons"
  3. People v. Ingle

    36 N.Y.2d 413 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 610 times
    In People v Ingle (36 N.Y.2d 413, supra), this Court discussed the reasonableness of "routine safety checks" undertaken by the State Police pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 390 in which the police temporarily detained vehicles to determine whether they were "being operated in compliance with the Vehicle and Traffic Law" (id., at 415).
  4. People v. Robinson

    74 N.Y.2d 773 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 203 times

    Argued May 31, 1989 Decided July 11, 1989 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, William Garry, J. Amy Donner and Philip L. Weinstein for appellant. Elizabeth Holtzman, District Attorney (Elizabeth S. Ostrow and Barbara D. Underwood of counsel), for respondent. MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division affirming the judgment of conviction and the denial of suppression should be affirmed. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution

  5. People v. Torres

    74 N.Y.2d 224 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 201 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In People v. Torres (74 N.Y.2d 224, 226), we explained that "[a] police officer acting on reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot and on an articulable basis to fear for his own safety may intrude upon the person or personal effects of the suspect only to the extent that is actually necessary to protect himself from harm."
  6. People v. Garcia

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 8670 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 101 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Garcia, where the Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division's determination that the police lacked the requisite founded suspicion when, upon stopping a vehicle for a mere defective brake light, an officer asked if any of the occupants had a weapon (see People v Garcia, 20 NY3d at 324).
  7. People v. Mundo

    99 N.Y.2d 55 (N.Y. 2002)   Cited 73 times
    In Mundo, the failure of the driver to stop the vehicle and the repeated attempts to evade the police, which resulted in a near collision with a pedestrian, demonstrated a willingness to endanger the safety of others (see 99 N.Y.2d at 57, 750 N.Y.S.2d 837, 780 N.E.2d 522).
  8. People v. Carvey

    89 N.Y.2d 707 (N.Y. 1997)   Cited 78 times
    In Carvey, the bulletproof vest, combined with the defendant's act of furtively placing something under his seat — which implied that the gun was previously held at ready — was sufficient to justify the protective search because it suggested "more than the presence of a deadly weapon — it demonstrate[d] [the defendant's] readiness and willingness to use a deadly weapon" (89 NY2d at 712).
  9. People v. May

    52 A.D.3d 147 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Approving of "[the officers'] request for limited information and documents, and their detention of the vehicle for purposes of calling in a computer check [including a warrant check] and drawing up a summons proper based upon the traffic violation" that the officers viewed the defendant commit
  10. State v. Jones

    39 A.D.3d 1169 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)   Cited 20 times

    No. 384 KA 06-03349. April 20, 2007. Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Joseph E. Fahey, J.), rendered August 21, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree. J. SCOTT PORTER, SENECA FALLS, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JAMES P. MAXWELL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. Present — Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Centra, Fahey and Green, JJ. It is hereby ordered