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. Curly HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Thomas Galligan, J.), rendered October 19, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations, which are supported by the record (see People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380). In a drug-prone neighborhood, defendant exhibited nervous behavior upon the arrival of a marked police car. He repeatedly looked over his shoulder at the officer, making eye contact several times. Defendant, who was wearing a bulky jacket, walked stiffly and braced his arm against his waist, in a manner that suggested that he was concealing an object under his jacket. He quickly entered and left a restaurant known to the officer for drug activity. The totality of these observations gave rise to a founded suspicion that criminal activity was afoot that justified a common-law right to inquire (see People v. Pines, 281 A.D.2d 311, 722 N.Y.S.2d 239, affd. 99 N.Y.2d 525, 752 N.Y.S.2d 266, 782 N.E.2d 62). Defendant's immediate flight, before the police could even approach him to make an inquiry, established reasonable suspicion and justified the police pursuit (id.). The police properly recovered the package of cocaine discarded by defendant during his flight.
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief.
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: January 06, 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)