Opinion
December 20, 1993
Appeal from the County Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.).
Ordered that the orders are affirmed.
We agree with the County Court's determination that the seizure and search of the defendant's bag was predicated upon less than reasonable suspicion that the defendant was involved in criminal activity (see, People v Diaz, 81 N.Y.2d 106; People v Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181; People v De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210). Therefore, suppression of the physical evidence recovered from inside the bag was appropriate. Furthermore, inasmuch as the People failed to establish any attenuation of the taint of the illegal arrest and the defendant's subsequent statements (see, People v Conyers, 68 N.Y.2d 982, 983), the defendant's statements were also properly suppressed (see, People v Harris, 77 N.Y.2d 434; People v Johnson, 66 N.Y.2d 398, 407-408; People v Woods, 189 A.D.2d 838, 843). Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.