People v. Havrish

8 N.Y.3d 389 (2007) · New York Court of Appeals · April 3, 2007

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that a defendant’s court-ordered surrender of an unlicensed handgun was protected by the Fifth Amendment’s act-of-production doctrine. Because the surrender was compelled, testimonial, and incriminating, the court granted suppression and dismissed the accusatory instrument in the absence of independent evidence of possession. The court reversed the order of County Court.

Court
New York Court of Appeals
Writing for the Court
Graffeo, J.; Chief Judge Kaye; Judge Ciparick; Judge Read; Judge Smith; Judge Pigott
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
April 3, 2007
Procedural posture
The People appealed County Court's reversal of Jefferson Town Court's suppression order and reinstatement of the weapons-possession charge. The New York Court of Appeals granted defendant leave to appeal.
Standard of review
The court reviewed de novo whether the compelled surrender of the handgun was testimonial and incriminating under the Fifth Amendment act-of-production doctrine and whether suppression and dismissal were warranted.
Precedential value
published precedential opinion of the New York Court of Appeals
Parties
People v. Havrish
Disposition
reversed

Topics

criminal procedurefifth amendmentsuppression of evidenceexclusionary ruleevidence

Practice areas

criminal procedureconstitutional lawevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether defendant's court-ordered surrender of an unlicensed handgun constituted compelled testimonial and incriminating communication protected by the Fifth Amendment.
  2. Whether the handgun and related statements should be suppressed and the accusatory instrument dismissed when the compelled act of production was the exclusive source of the prosecution's evidence.

Holdings

  1. The compelled surrender of the handgun was privileged under the Fifth Amendment because the act of production was testimonial and incriminating.
  2. Suppression of the handgun and related evidence required dismissal because the People identified no independent source for evidence connecting defendant to the revolver.

Key quotations

When the government demands that an item be produced, the only thing compelled is the act of producing the item . . . The Fifth Amendment’s protection may nonetheless be implicated because the act of complying with the government’s demand testifies to the existence, possession, or authenticity of the things produced (394)
Both elements of the act of production doctrine having been met, defendant’s surrender of the unlicensed handgun was privileged under the Fifth Amendment and suppression of the evidence was therefore warranted in the weapon possession prosecution. (397)

Factual background

An order of protection issued in a domestic-violence prosecution directed defendant to surrender all firearms. Defendant surrendered his long guns and later told police that he had located a Ruger Blackhawk .44 magnum revolver in his home. Police retrieved the handgun and determined that defendant lacked a license for it, leading to a charge of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree. The People offered no evidence that they would have independently discovered defendant's possession of the revolver.

Procedural history

Defendant was charged in Jefferson Town Court with criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree after surrendering an unlicensed handgun pursuant to an order of protection. Jefferson Town Court granted suppression and dismissed the accusatory instrument. County Court reversed and reinstated the charge. The Court of Appeals reversed County Court, granted suppression, and dismissed the accusatory instrument.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…