New York Criminal Attorney Blog
In an October 2023 case before a New York court, the defendant appealed the lower of the lower court’s denial of his motion to suppress incriminating evidence. The defendant was originally charged with criminal possession of a weapon based on a 2015 run-in with police officers. After being criminally charged with a felony, the defendant asked the court to suppress the incriminating evidence, a gun, that officers found in his personal vehicle during a routine inventory search. The court denied the defendant’s motion, who then appealed the denial of his motion to suppress. The higher court, considering the defendant’s appeal, ultimately ruled that the officers’ search was constitutional. The court therefore affirmed the original conviction.
Facts of the Case
According to the opinion, officers were on patrol one evening when they noticed the defendant driving by in his truck. The officers saw the defendant commit multiple traffic violations, and they therefore conducted a routine traffic stop. The officers subsequently discovered a “gravity knife” in the defendant’s pocket, which was illegal for the defendant to possess at the time. The law has since changed. The officers brought the defendant in for processing. They then conducted an “inventory search” of the defendant’s truck, and they found a gun in the car’s trunk. At that point, facing criminal charges for possession of a weapon, the defendant filed a motion to suppress.
The Decision
The court denied the defendant’s motion to suppress, and he promptly filed an appeal. On appeal, the defendant argued that the police officers’ search protocol was unconstitutional. The officers found the firearm because, after they brought the defendant in for questioning, they conducted a standard inventory search of the vehicle. According to the defendant, the officers had too much leeway to conduct the inventory search without his consent – it was not fair that they were able to sift through his car’s contents while he was in custody.
The court clarified that the purpose of an inventory search is to protect the defendant’s property, to protect the police against any claim of lost property, and to protect officers from dangerous instruments. Here, the officers were acting in accordance with these goals and in accordance with a written policy for when to conduct such searches. They acted in good faith, and they followed all relevant procedures in conducting the search.
Therefore, despite the defendant’s argument to the contrary, the officers’ search was constitutional. The defendant’s appeal was denied and his conviction and sentence were affirmed.
Are You on the Lookout for a New York Criminal Defense Attorney?
At Tilem & Associates, our goal is to provide strategic and aggressive criminal defense representation, with your personal goals at the forefront of our litigation. Our firm has been serving the state of New York for over 25 years, and we are standing by, ready to take your call. We handle all types of cases, including gun crimes and other weapons offenses, violent crimes, domestic violence allegations and more. For a free and confidential consultation, call us today at 877-377-8666. You can also fill out our online form if you would like to tell us about your case and have an attorney reach back out to you as soon as possible.