People v. Aragon

2025 NY Slip Op 00055 · Appellate Division, First Department · January 7, 2025 · No. Ind. No. 3822/18 Appeal No. 3428 Case No. 2020-03813

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department reversed a defendant's conviction for criminal possession of controlled substances and dismissed the indictment after granting his motion to suppress. The court found that the officer lacked any intention to arrest the defendant prior to conducting the search, rendering the seizure of cocaine and money unlawful. As a result, all recovered contraband was suppressed, necessitating the dismissal of the remaining charges.

Court
Appellate Division, First Department
Writing for the Court
Webber, J.P.; Friedman; Mendez; Shulman; Rodriguez
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
January 7, 2025
Docket number
Ind. No. 3822/18 Appeal No. 3428 Case No. 2020-03813
Procedural posture
Appeal from judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County granting motion to suppress and dismissing indictment.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Andy Aragon v. People of the State of New York
Disposition
reversed

Topics

search and seizurefourth amendmentexclusionary rulecriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedureevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the frisk of the defendant's person was lawful under the Fourth Amendment.
  2. Whether the seized cocaine and money must be suppressed and the indictment dismissed.

Holdings

  1. The frisk was unlawful because the officer lacked an intent to arrest the defendant at the time of the search; therefore, the evidence obtained must be suppressed.
  2. All cocaine and money recovered must be suppressed and the indictment dismissed.

Key quotations

Defendant was entitled to suppression of the cocaine and money recovered in a search of his person, which occurred after officers pulled over the minivan in which he was a passenger for two traffic violations and detected a strong odor of marijuana as they approached the van.

Factual background

Police officers stopped the defendant's minivan for two traffic violations, smelled marijuana, observed loose marijuana on the defendant's lap, and frisked him, finding a small bag in his pocket and a larger bag in his underwear. The officers had no expressed intent to arrest the defendant before the frisk.

Procedural history

The trial court denied the defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained during a frisk after a traffic stop. The appellate division reviewed the denial and reversed, granting the motion and dismissing the indictment.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…