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.
PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rickie JACKSON, Defendant-Respondent.
The People appeal from an order that granted the motion of defendant to suppress evidence obtained during an inventory search of his vehicle preceding the impoundment of the vehicle. The police stopped the vehicle driven by defendant based on their observation of routine traffic violations, and the police then discovered that the registration of the vehicle had been suspended for lack of insurance. In granting the motion, Supreme Court determined that the inventory search of the vehicle was not conducted in compliance with the Rochester Police Department's guidelines for inventory searches preceding impoundment. That was error. The police were authorized to impound the vehicle upon discovering that the registration of the vehicle had been suspended (see People v. Marasa, 284 A.D.2d 971, 726 N.Y.S.2d 899, lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 940, 733 N.Y.S.2d 380, 759 N.E.2d 379), and the record establishes that the inventory search was properly “conducted pursuant to ‘an established procedure clearly limiting the conduct of individual officers that assures that [inventory] searches are carried out consistently and reasonably’ ” (People v. Johnson, 1 N.Y.3d 252, 256, 771 N.Y.S.2d 64, 803 N.E.2d 385; see People v. Ballard, 174 A.D.2d 1025, 572 N.Y.S.2d 190, lv. denied 79 N.Y.2d 824, 580 N.Y.S.2d 204, 588 N.E.2d 102).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law, the motion is denied and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for further proceedings on the indictment.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: March 18, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)