Case ID: ny-2d_79/html/0888-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of Antoine W., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Respondent. Presentment Agency, Appellant.
    Argued January 7, 1992;
    decided February 20, 1992
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Victor A. Kovner, Corporation Counsel (Stephen J. McGrath and Leonard Koerner of counsel), for appellant.
    
      Kenneth Rabb and Lenore Gittis for respondent.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Although the police had an "objective credible reason” for approaching the defendant, the pointed questioning regarding the ownership of the bag and consent to search it was improper because it was not based on a founded suspicion of criminal activity (People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210, 215). Because the defendant’s consent was a product of the improper police inquiry, the Family Court erred when it found that the defendant had consented to the search of his bag (see, People v Hollman, 79 NY2d 181 [decided today]).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur; Judge Alexander taking no part.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.