In People v. Mobley , Donald Mobley asked the Bronx County Supreme Court to suppress -- or prevent -- the District Attorney from admitting into evidence a gun found by two police officers.
Mobley and a young woman were seated in a parked car in an area of the Bronx known for crime and prostitution. After the officers approached Mobley's vehicle, they inquired what he was doing in the area, exited their cruiser and approached on foot. The officers eventually searched Mobley's car and found a firearm.
When the Bronx County Supreme Court granted Mobley's suppression request, an appeal to the Appellate Division, First Department, ensued. In its decision, the AD1 observed:
Once the police questioned the occupants of the car and found nothing to create any degree of suspicion, the police clearly had no basis for their second approach and inquiry, made on foot. … Furthermore, we conclude the ultimate discovery of the firearm in the car was the direct result of the second inquiry, and cannot accurately be characterized as a mere observation, from a lawful vantage point, of contraband in plain view.
Because the search was unjustifiable, the AD1 agreed that suppression of the weapon was appropriate.
Sorry, but all this talk of suppression is getting to me.
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use the following link: People v. Mobley