People v. King, 481 N.E.2d 541 (NY 1985). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. King, 481 N.E.2d 541 (NY 1985). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986 2006 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Harper
N.Y. App. Div. · 2010 · confidence medium
In this context, defendant’s evasive and suspicious conduct provided reasonable suspicion justifying his detention and a protective frisk, particularly when coupled with the fact that the officer who detained defendant was aware of allegations that defendant was involved in the gun trade (see People v King, 65 NY2d 702, 703 [1985]; People v Nichols, 250 AD2d 370, 370-371 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 881 [1998]).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Brannon
N.Y. App. Div. · 2009 · signal: see also · confidence low
The combination of defendant’s suspiciously evasive conduct, the officer’s observation that defendant was carrying what was at the least a large and possibly dangerous knife, and defendant’s acknowledgment, in response to a proper common-law inquiry, that he had a knife, permitted the officer to conduct a self-protective frisk (see People v Batista, 88 NY2d 650, 654 [1996]; People v Benjamin, 51 NY2d 267, 271 [1980]; see also People v King, 102 AD2d 710 [1984], affd 65 NY2d 702 [1985]).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Robinson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2000 · signal: see also · confidence low
As the Court of Appeals has repeatedly held, probable cause turns, not on subjective considerations, but on “what was reasonably and objectively in the mind of law enforcement authorities.” (People v Jennings, 54 NY2d 518, 523 .) This Court has held, “In determining whether probable cause exists, an ‘objective judicial determination of the facts in existence and known to the officer’ prevails over the officer’s ‘subjective evaluation.’ ” (People v Jones, 219 AD2d 417, 421 , affd 90 NY2d 835 , quoting People v Lopez, 95 AD2d 241, 246 , lv denied 60 NY2d 968 ; see also, People …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Thomas King, Appellant
New York Court of Appeals.
Jun 4, 1985.
481 N.E.2d 541
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Karen Goldstein and William E. Hellerstein for appellant., Mario Merola, District Attorney (Kevin Lubin and Steven P. Kartagener of counsel), for respondent.
Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander Concur Judge Titone Taking No Part.
Cited by 17 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The defendant, approached by a police officer for a gambling violation, fled to a nearby store and refused to come out until the officer had pried the door open. The officer then frisked the defendant and found a loaded handgun. Under the circumstances we agree with the courts below that the frisk of the defendant did not violate his constitutional rights. Although the fact that a person has been stopped for a violation does not ordinarily justify a frisk (People v St. Clair, 54 NY2d 900), a limited pat down for concealed weapons was reasonable in light of the defendant’s uncooperative and suspicious conduct after he had been ordered to stop by the officer.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander concur; Judge Titone taking no part.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.