New York Court of Appeals, 1977

People v. Stroller

New York Court of Appeals · Decided October 11, 1977

42 N.Y.2d 1052; 369 N.E.2d 763; 399 N.Y.S.2d 207; 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2391

Cases that cite this one

22 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Lee (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
People v. Landy (N.Y. 1983)
People v. Moya (Criminal Court of the City of New York 2002)
People v. Smith (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
People v. Adams (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
People v. Sevilla (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
People v. Torres (N.Y. 1989)
People v. Torres (New York Supreme Court 1987)
People v. Bronston (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
People v. Reynolds (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
People v. Stone (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
People v. Fernandez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
People v. Brooks (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
People v. Clee (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
People v. Foster (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
People v. Benjamin (N.Y. 1980)
People v. Boyd (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1980)
People v. Samuels (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
People v. Benjamin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
People v. McLaurin (N.Y. 1978)
People v. Santiago (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1978)
People v. Kinlock (N.Y. 1977)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Memorandum. The police were obligated to respond to the call and investigate the complaint of a man armed with a gun. *1053At night in a high crime area they found the defendant who matched the description given by the caller. When, upon inquiry by the police, the defendant gave an unintelligible, unresponsive reply, the officer could then make a limited pat down search in the nature of a frisk, not to discover evidence of a crime, but in order to pursue his investigation without fear of violence (see, People v Stewart, 41 NY2d 65).

Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the case remitted to that court for review of the facts.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order reversed and the case remitted to the Appellate Division, First Department, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.