People v. Pines

New York Court of Appeals
752 N.Y.S.2d 266, 99 N.Y.2d 525, 782 N.E.2d 62 (2002)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A defendant's flight from police, when combined with other objective circumstances indicating potential criminal activity, such as nervous behavior and actions suggesting a concealed weapon in a high-crime area, can establish the reasonable suspicion required to justify police pursuit.

Facts:

Three plainclothes police officers in an unmarked vehicle were patrolling a drug-prone area late at night.
The officers observed the defendant walking and looking around nervously.
Upon noticing the officers' car, the defendant's eyes "bulged out," and he stared at the vehicle as he continued walking.
As the car approached, the defendant placed his hand under his jacket in a "cupping motion" and positioned his body to keep that side hidden from the officers.
The defendant then abruptly turned, abandoned his companion, and began walking in the opposite direction while still holding the side of his coat.
When two officers exited their vehicle, displayed their shields, and asked to speak with him, the defendant immediately fled on foot.
During the ensuing pursuit, an officer saw the defendant holding a gun and then throwing it into a garbage can.

Procedural Posture:

Following his arrest, the defendant was charged with criminal weapons possession.
The defendant filed a motion to suppress the gun and his statements to the police.
The New York Supreme Court (the trial court) granted the defendant's suppression motion.
The People (the prosecution) appealed the suppression order to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court (an intermediate appellate court).
The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's order, denying the motion to suppress.
The defendant then appealed that decision to the New York Court of Appeals (the state's highest court).

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does a defendant's unprovoked flight, combined with a nervous demeanor and a gesture suggestive of concealing a weapon in a drug-prone area, provide police with the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify pursuit?

Opinions:

Majority - Per Curiam/Memorandum

Yes. A defendant's flight, when considered in conjunction with other attendant circumstances, can create the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify police pursuit. The court found that the defendant's initial actions—nervousness, eye-bulging, and the cupping motion under his jacket which suggested a concealed weapon—created a founded suspicion permitting a common-law inquiry under People v. De Bour. The defendant's subsequent, unprovoked flight upon the officers' non-coercive approach elevated that founded suspicion to the level of reasonable suspicion, justifying the pursuit. The court, citing People v. Martinez, held that whether circumstances give rise to reasonable suspicion is a mixed question of law and fact, and it would not disturb the lower appellate court's finding as there was sufficient support for it in the record.

Analysis:

This decision reinforces the legal principle that while flight alone is insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion, it is a highly significant factor in the totality of the circumstances analysis. The case clarifies that a sequence of individually ambiguous acts (nervousness, a furtive gesture, presence in a high-crime area) can cumulatively amount to a founded suspicion. When a suspect then flees from a lawful, non-threatening police encounter, that flight can serve as the critical final element that elevates suspicion to the level required for a forcible stop and pursuit. This provides a clear framework for law enforcement and lower courts in evaluating the legality of police pursuits initiated after a brief, non-coercive encounter.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: People v. Pines (2002)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"