From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Flowers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 22, 1997
239 A.D.2d 272 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

May 22, 1997

Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County (Murray Mogel, J.),


Given the arresting officer's expertise concerning drug trafficking by bus passengers, his observations of defendant's conduct and demeanor provided an objective, credible reason for approaching defendant to request information ( see, People v Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181, 193). Although the officer had already observed defendant deposit a bag under the bus, the officer's initial inquiry as to whether defendant was carrying any luggage was neither accusatory nor intimidating, and thus did not take the encounter beyond a request for information ( supra, at 191-192). Once defendant denied ownership of the bag, which was contrary to the officer's observations, the officer had a founded suspicion that criminal activity was afoot, permitting further inquiry.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Ellerin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Flowers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 22, 1997
239 A.D.2d 272 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Flowers

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KOVON FLOWERS…

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

Date published: May 22, 1997

Citations

239 A.D.2d 272 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
658 N.Y.S.2d 265

Citing Cases

People v. Wellington

Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. Given the arresting officer's expertise (see, People v.…

People v. Gabriel

We see no reason to disturb the hearing court's credibility determinations, which are supported by the…