In Rivera (14 N.Y.2d 441, 447, supra), the court sustained the validity of a frisk — that is, "a contact or patting of the [defendant's] outer clothing" — on the ground that it was a procedure necessary for the protection of police officers, "as an incident to inquiry upon grounds of elemental safety and precaution," once they decide to stop a suspiciously acting person and question him.
Summary of this case from People v. PugachDecided October 24, 1963
ORDER AFFIRMED
In Rivera (14 N.Y.2d 441, 447, supra), the court sustained the validity of a frisk — that is, "a contact or patting of the [defendant's] outer clothing" — on the ground that it was a procedure necessary for the protection of police officers, "as an incident to inquiry upon grounds of elemental safety and precaution," once they decide to stop a suspiciously acting person and question him.
Summary of this case from People v. PugachFull title:PEOPLE v. RIVERA (MIGUEL) — (BR, JM, HS, SE, AS)
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Date published: Oct 24, 1963
We recently dealt with the reasonableness of a routine "frisk" made by police officers as an incident in the…