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. Chris POLLARD, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy Kahn, J. at suppression hearing; Bonnie Wittner, J. at jury trial and sentence), rendered October 20, 2000, convicting defendant of assault in the first degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree, attempted rape in the first degree and assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 22 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress statements made on the ground of an alleged violation of Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 100 S.Ct. 1371, 63 L.Ed.2d 639. Defendant's warrantless arrest at his apartment was justified by exigent circumstances (see People v. Knapp, 52 N.Y.2d 689, 439 N.Y.S.2d 871, 422 N.E.2d 531). When the police arrived, they had probable cause to believe that defendant had attacked two people that same day while armed with a knife. When defendant's 13-year-old sister opened the door and appeared to be in an anxious state, they had reason to believe the possibly armed and dangerous defendant was inside the apartment with her and that any delay for the purpose of securing a warrant would have created an unreasonable risk (see Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 87 S.Ct. 1642, 18 L.Ed.2d 782). The fact that the detectives did not draw their weapons does not negate the exigency of the situation since they believed defendant had been armed with a knife and had attacked one of the victims when provoked, and since the detectives understandably did not want to frighten defendant's young sister even more.
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: April 24, 2003
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)