Page 15 - WCBA CLE 6-14-2022

14

HOLDING ON APPEAL: This Court reversed the judgment of conviction, upon a jury
verdict, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree [PL 220.21]
and granted that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion to suppress physical
evidence on the ground that the County Court erred to the extent that it relied upon the
"fellow officer rule" to justify the stop of a vehicle under the Fourth Amendment to the
United States Constitution. The People failed to offer evidence that the unidentified
individual who advised state troopers to stop the vehicle had an adequate basis of
knowledge to conclude that it contained narcotics. The record did not support the
determination that a trooper's search was authorized after detecting the odor of
marihuana emanating from the vehicle, as the trooper affirmatively testified that he did
not smell the odor of marihuana at the scene of the traffic stop. The People failed to
show that the physical evidence was discovered during the course of a valid inventory
search, as the People failed to produce evidence demonstrating that the trooper
conducted the search properly and in compliance with established procedures.

FACTS: The defendant and co-defendant were charged by indictment with one count of
criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree and one count of
criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree. By omnibus motion,
the defendant moved to suppress a quantity of cocaine that had been recovered from a
vehicle after it was stopped by law enforcement officials. At a hearing, the People
presented, inter alia, the testimony of 2 police officers who were involved in the arrest of
the defendant and the County Court concluded that the stop and ensuing search were
lawful. After trial, the jury convicted the defendant of criminal possession of a controlled
substance in the first degree but acquitted her of criminal possession of a substance in
the third degree.

At the suppression hearing the People failed to offer any evidence to establish that the
unidentified individual who advised the troopers to stop the vehicle had an adequate
basis of knowledge to conclude that it contained narcotics. Thus, the County Court
erred as a matter of law to the extent that it relied upon the fellow officer rule to justify
the stop of the vehicle.

The People also failed to sustain their burden to show that the inventory search of the
vehicle was motivated by legitimate concerns, and that it was not a pretext to discover
incriminating evidence.

DISSENT: The People established that the cocaine recovered was discovered pursuant
to a valid inventory search and the order should be affirmed. Here, because the vehicle
lacked a valid registration due to an insurance lapse, the troopers were entitled to
impound the vehicle and were required to conduct an inventory search. The People
established that the inventory search was conducted pursuant to an established,
reasonable procedure and that the troopers prepared a meaningful inventory list
recording the property contained in the vehicle before releasing it to a private tow

6