People v. Class
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
In our earlier opinion in this case, we held that the police *433"officer’s nonconsensual entry into [defendant’s] automobile to determine the vehicle identification number violates the Federal and State Constitutions where it is based solely on a stop for a traffic infraction (US Const, 4th Amdt; NY Const, art I, § 12)” (63 NY2d 491, 493). The Supreme Court reversed on the Federal Constitution, holding that "the police officer’s action does not violate the Fourth Amendment” (475 US —, —, 106 S Ct 960, 963), and the case is now before us again.
In support of its own…
3Cases cited12 opinions
- Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- New York v. BeltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- New York v. FerberSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- New York v. QuarlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- New York v. ClassSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by60 opinions
- Immuno AG. v. Moor-JankowskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- People v. TorresNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- People v. HarrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- People v. P. J. Video, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1986
- State v. LaroccoUtah Supreme Court · 1990
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.