People v. Driscoll
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtRose, J.
*1467To conduct a protective pat frisk, an officer “must have ‘knowledge of some fact or circumstance that supports a reasonable suspicion that the suspect is armed or poses a threat to safety’ ” (People v Caicedo, 69 AD3d 954, 954 [2010], lv denied 14 NY3d 886 [2010], quoting People v Batista, 88 NY2d 650, 654 [1996]; see People v Siler, 288 AD2d 625, 626 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 709 [2002]). Here, in concluding that the officers were justified in conducting the frisk, County Court relied on the probable cause to arrest defendant for the noise violation, his parole status and the suspicious…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- People v. BatistaNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- People v. RussNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. CarneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. SilerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- People v. HowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.