Summary
This Appellate Division, First Department decision reverses the defendant's convictions for tampering with physical evidence and resisting arrest. The court held that the prosecution failed to demonstrate that the warrantless search of the defendant's fanny pack constituted a lawful search incident to arrest, as there was no evidence the officer had actually arrested or intended to arrest the defendant before opening the bag. Consequently, the convictions derived from the improper search were reversed, and the indictment was dismissed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the search of the defendant's fanny pack was a proper search incident to a lawful arrest.
Holdings
- The People failed to demonstrate that the search was proper because they did not establish that the officer actually arrested the defendant or intended to arrest him before opening the bag; therefore the search was unlawful and the resulting convictions must be reversed.
Key quotations
“The People failed to demonstrate that the search of defendant's fanny pack was a proper search incident to a lawful arrest because they failed to establish either that the officer actually arrested defendant or intended to do so before opening his bag (see People v. Reid, 24 N.Y.3d 615, 619 [2014]; People v. Mangum, 125 A.D.3d 401, 402 [1st Dept 2015]).” (*1)
Factual background
Defendant Sabriel Lamberty was stopped by police, who searched his fanny pack and later convicted him of tampering with physical evidence and resisting arrest. The search was challenged on the ground that the officer had not actually arrested Lamberty nor intended to do so before opening the bag.
Procedural history
The Supreme Court, New York County convicted Lamberty of tampering with physical evidence and resisting arrest and sentenced him to 1½–3 years. The Appellate Division reversed the convictions and dismissed the indictment, holding the search of his fanny pack was not a valid search incident to arrest.