Opinion · New York Court of Appeals

People v. Copeland

39 N.Y.2d 986

Type
Opinion
Court
New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction
New York
Date
1976-07-06
Topic
labor-and-employment

How later courts describe this case

  • holding that arrest and search during traffic stop were lawful because defendant stated he did not possess license
  • when asked for registration, “operator shall furnish to ... police officer any information necessary for the identification of such vehicle and its owner”

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed People v. Copeland. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
36 opinions

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Term should be affirmed.

In the early morning hours a patrolman stopped the automobile defendant was driving after it had been observed weaving from lane to lane. On being asked for his driver’s license, defendant stated that he did not possess a license, and he was thereupon arrested for violation of section 509 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law (CPL 140.10, subd 1, par [a]). Further inquiry disclosed that defendant carried no identification. The arresting officer then frisked him, and when defendant emptied his pockets the contraband fell out.

Without the available data on which to prepare a uniform *987 traffic summons and confronted with the driver of a weaving car who possessed no operator’s license, we can only conclude that this arrest was warranted and that the search of defendant’s person incident thereto was surely lawful (cf. People v Troiano, 35 NY2d 476). Accordingly, the motion to suppress was properly denied.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.