Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Marcy DAVENPORT, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee A. White, J. at suppression hearing; Lewis Bart Stone, J. at jury trial and sentence), rendered August 27, 2001, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing her, as a second felony offender, to a term of 6 years to life, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress physical evidence. Since defendant conceded at the suppression hearing that the police had the right to stop and frisk her, her current argument to the contrary is unpreserved (see e.g. People v. Vasquez, 66 N.Y.2d 968, 498 N.Y.S.2d 788, 489 N.E.2d 757, cert. denied 475 U.S. 1109, 106 S.Ct. 1517, 89 L.Ed.2d 916), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Furthermore, the record is insufficient to permit review of her claim that the radio run to which the police responded was the product of an anonymous call (see People v. Tutt, 38 N.Y.2d 1011, 1012-1013, 384 N.Y.S.2d 444, 348 N.E.2d 920). Although defendant did preserve her argument that the police were not justified in removing an item from her pocket, that argument is unavailing. An officer patted down defendant and felt a hard and heavy object that he properly removed, since he reasonably feared it to be a weapon based on his familiarity with small handguns (see People v. Ayala, 265 A.D.2d 155, 696 N.Y.S.2d 131, lv. denied 94 N.Y.2d 860, 704 N.Y.S.2d 535, 725 N.E.2d 1097).
With regard to defendant's statement, even if we were to assume that she told the police that she wanted to call her children so that they could get her a lawyer, we would find the error in admitting her statement to be harmless (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787) in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: July 22, 2004
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)