People v Dempsey
2010 NY Slip Op 09769 [79 AD3d 1776]
December 30, 2010
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
As corrected through Wednesday, February 16, 2011


The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Aaron J.Dempsey, Appellant.

[*1]Kristin F. Splain, Conflict Defender, Rochester (Kimberly J. Czapranski of counsel), fordefendant-appellant.

Michael C. Green, District Attorney, Rochester (Nancy A. Gilligan of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Alex R. Renzi, J.), renderedSeptember 19, 2007. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminalpossession of a weapon in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the thirddegree, illegal signal from parked position and no head lamps.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, interalia, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]),defendant contends that County Court erred in refusing to suppress the weapon that the policeseized from his person. According great deference to the court's determination (see generallyPeople v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761 [1977]), we reject that contention. It is well settled thatthe police may lawfully stop a vehicle where, as here, they have "probable cause to believe thatthe driver of [the vehicle] has committed a traffic violation" (People v Robinson, 97NY2d 341, 349 [2001]). Contrary to defendant's contention, "[i]n making [a] determination ofprobable cause, neither the primary motivation of the officer nor a determination of what areasonable traffic officer would have done under the circumstances is relevant"(Robinson, 97 NY2d at 349). Furthermore, "out of a concern for safety, 'officers may. . . exercise their discretion to require a driver who commits a traffic violation [aswell as the passengers in the vehicle] to exit the vehicle even though they lack anyparticularized reason for believing the driver [or a passenger] possesses a weapon' "(People v Robinson, 74 NY2d 773, 774 [1989], cert denied 493 US 966 [1989],quoting New York v Class, 475 US 106, 115 [1986]). Here, a handgun was recoveredfrom a passenger in the vehicle and, "[t]hus, the police had the requisite reasonable suspicion tobelieve that at least one of the occupants of the vehicle was armed prior to conducting thepat-down search[ ]" of defendant (People v Edwards, 52 AD3d 1266, 1267 [2008], lv denied11 NY3d 736 [2008]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Smith, Green, Pine and Gorski, 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.