People v Flemming
2009 NY Slip Op 00860 [59 AD3d 1004]
February 6, 2009
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
As corrected through Wednesday, April 1, 2009


The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v RickyFlemming, Appellant.

[*1]Peter J. DiGiorgio, Jr., Utica, for defendant-appellant.

Scott D. McNamara, District Attorney, Utica (Steven G. Cox of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Oneida County (Barry M. Donalty, A.J.),rendered May 19, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminalpossession of a weapon in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty ofcriminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [former (4)]).Contrary to defendant's contention, Supreme Court properly refused to suppress evidence,including a handgun, seized by a police officer from defendant's person. After the vehicle inwhich defendant was a passenger was lawfully stopped for a traffic violation, defendant refusedto move his hands in accordance with the officer's instructions to do so, thereby threatening thesafety of the officer. The officer, who had been told by a fellow officer that defendant hadpreviously carried a handgun, also observed a bulge in defendant's waistband. "Considering thetotality of the circumstances . . . , there was an ample measure of reasonablesuspicion necessary to justify" the officer's limited frisk for weapons (People vBenjamin, 51 NY2d 267, 271 [1980]; see People v Robinson, 278 AD2d 808, 809[2000], lv denied 96 NY2d 787 [2001]; see generally People v Prochilo, 41NY2d 759, 761-762 [1977]). Contrary to defendant's further contention, "the five-year period ofpostrelease supervision is mandatory based on defendant's status as a second felony offender"(People v McQuiller, 19 AD3d1043, 1045 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 808 [2005]; see People v Ware, 28 AD3d1124, 1125 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 852 [2006]), and thus the sentence is notillegal. Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Martoche, Smith, Centra and Peradotto, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.