From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Webb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 26, 2002
291 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

5545

February 26, 2002.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (George Daniels, J.), rendered January 6, 1998, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of 1 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

Alice Wiseman for respondent.

T.J. Morrow for defendant-appellant.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Wallach, Marlow, JJ.


Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. While investigating violent crimes, in particular cab robberies, in the area of 138th Street and 12th Avenue in Manhattan, the police lawfully stopped a taxi cab for a traffic infraction (see, People v. Robinson, 2001 N.Y. LEXIS 3790, 97 N.Y.2d 341 [Dec. 18, 2001], affirming 271 A.D.2d 17). The police then opened the cab doors as an appropriate security measure after one of the approaching officers had seen defendant, who was in the backseat, throwing something on the floor (see, People v. David L., 56 N.Y.2d 698, revg on dissenting mem 81 A.D.2d 893, 895-96, cert denied 459 U.S. 866). The ensuing discovery of narcotics paraphernalia in plain view provided probable cause for defendant's arrest (see, People v. Hill, 64 A.D.2d 907), and the remaining contraband, along with defendant's statements, were lawfully obtained (see, People v. Glenn, 279 A.D.2d 422, affd sub nom People v. Robinson, 2001 N.Y. LEXIS 3790, 97 N.Y.2d 341 [Dec.18, 2001]).

Defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 713-14). At the hearing, defense counsel vigorously pursued appropriate suppression theories, exhibiting a thorough grasp of the factual issues and knowledge of the applicable law. In particular, defense counsel urged the then arguable position that the stop was a pretext and that Whren v. United States ( 517 U.S. 806) should not apply.

Defendant's specific argument, that counsel failed to adequately examine the People's witnesses about facts which would support a pretext stop theory, is without merit and of no moment in light of the recent Court of Appeals decision in People v. Robinson, supra, which specifically adopted Whren as a matter of State law. In Robinson, the Court of Appeals held that a police officer who has probable cause to believe a driver had committed a traffic infraction does not violate the New York State Constitution when the officer, whose primary motivation is to conduct another investigation, stops the vehicle. Accordingly, the stop was proper, and the evidence seized admissible.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Webb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 26, 2002
291 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Webb

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. RAHMAN WEBB…

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

Date published: Feb 26, 2002

Citations

291 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
737 N.Y.S.2d 618

Citing Cases

Lee v. Town of Southampton

Moreover, the "seizure of [a] camera to prevent defendant from deleting any ... photographs [is] incidental…

People v. Zapata

3). Defendant's response — to immediately point the camera lens upward and say, "oh, no, I'm just taking…