Legal Opinion
People v. Luna
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 21, 1989PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Hancock, Jr., J.
This appeal requires us to determine the level of suspicion, if any, necessary under the Federal and State Constitutions to justify singling out an entrant at the national border for a pat-down search. Defendant contends that the same "reasonable suspicion” required for stops and frisks in domestic situations should apply (see, Terry v Ohio, 392 US 1, 30; People v La Pene, 40 NY2d 210, 223). The People argue that pat downs are merely incidental to routine border searches for which no justification is required other than the fact that they occur at the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- United States v. CortezSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- United States v. Brignoni-PonceSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- People v. De BourNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- People v. MoreNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
- United States v. Jean Eddy Charleus and Jean Michel Louis, Jean Eddy CharleusCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- People v. RinconAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- State of Arizona v. Patricia A. BarnesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- People v. PerezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.