New York Court of Appeals, 1992

People v. Diaz

New York Court of Appeals · Decided October 22, 1992

80 N.Y.2d 950; 605 N.E.2d 358; 590 N.Y.S.2d 871; 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 3472

Cases that cite this one

14 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Weaver (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
People v. Pilgrim (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
In re Torry R. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
People v. Madera (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
In re Miguel C. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
People v. Lawrence (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
People v. Kojac (New York Supreme Court 1998)
State v. Giles (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
People v. Bent (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
Board of Education v. Christa Construction, Inc. (N.Y. 1993)
People v. Oeller (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
People v. Bora (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
People v. Reyes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
People v. Fitz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Trained narcotics officers driving through a drug-prone neighborhood spotted defendant clutching a plastic bag tightly against his body. These circumstances, although not necessarily indicative of criminality, justified the officers’ initial approach for the purposes of asking defendant to identify himself and state his purpose in the neighborhood (see, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210). That one officer held his hand on his bolstered gun as he approached defendant was not, by itself, sufficient to raise the encounter to a second-level investigatory stop under De Bour, and defendant intentionally abandoned the plastic bag and fled before the officers had any opportunity to ask him any questions. Accordingly, the courts below correctly denied defendant’s motion to suppress.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur; Judge Smith taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.