Court Opinion

ID: 5832638
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 22:29:19.6981+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:29.736003
License: Public Domain

Mollen, P. J. (concurring).
I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Rabin that the judgment should be reversed, on the law, and the indictment dismissed. I would further reverse on the additional ground that the motion for suppression of the physical evidence should have been granted.
Under the circumstances present, the police officer had an insufficient basis to arrest the defendant. There was a sufficient basis to stop the defendant’s vehicle and question the defendant. However, the mere observation of three screwdriver-type implements and a flashlight on the front seat of the vehicle was insufficient to justify the arrest of the defendant. Therefore, the subsequent impounding and search of the vehicle was not warranted and the motion to suppress the physical evidence which was found as a result of the search, should have been granted.