The following excerpt is from People v. Johnson, 474 N.E.2d 241, 485 N.Y.S.2d 33, 64 N.Y.2d 617 (N.Y. 1984):
At the suppression hearing, counsel for the defendant argued that there was no "credible basis" upon which to stop defendant. The "credible basis" test is that utilized to evaluate the legality of police exercise of the common-law right of inquiry. (People v. Carrasquillo, 54 N.Y.2d 248, 253, 445 N.Y.S.2d 97, 429 N.E.2d 775.) Moreover, it is significant that counsel for the defendant never argued that constructive or actual restraint was utilized to detain defendant, despite the People's unrebutted testimony that defendant was free to leave at any time. Thus, where defendant sought application of the standard utilized to assess the validity of an inquiry, and where all evidence points to an absence of detention, it is disingenuous for appellant to argue on appeal that what actually occurred was a "stop". Indeed, that what had transpired was a simple inquiry was argued before this court by the People's assertion, at page 10 of their brief, that "the officer who approached defendant had a right to inquire of appellant his name and, as in this case, whether he was armed". (Citations omitted.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.