Criminal Law I & II Michael Ferriero Ferriero 1
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jose Mundo, Appellant.

286 A.D.2d 592; 730 N.Y.S.2d 305; 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8392

September 13, 2001, Decided

September 13, 2001, Entered

Facts: In this case, two police officers from an anti-crime unit were on patrol in an unmarked car in Manhattan, they spotted a white Nissan automobile that had Florida plates on it, this car made a right turn at a steady red light. The officers noticed and then began to follow this vehicle, they began to flash there lights at this car until it finally pulled over. Following them pulling over this vehicle they both got out and began to approach this automobile on foot, as they kept getting closer the vehicle began to role away. Proceeding to keep rolling away the officers ran back to their police car and began a chase after this vehicle. This time they activated the sirens and the lights to pull the white Nissan over, but then again the Nissan began to pull away as the police approached the car for a third time. They noticed that the passenger in the front seat kept turning around and facing the police. The police used lights, sirens, and horn, and the vehicle once again pulled over. The police are now being cautious and approached the car with their guns draw, they removed each of the defendants from the vehicle and they were all patted down. The one officer
Ferriero 2 went to the back seat to check and see if there were any weapons, were the defendant kept turning around to. He noticed there was a handle to get to the trunk, thinking the defendant concealed a weapon there he opened the trunk, he then began to smell a strong odor of cocaine. The officer saw there was only a bag of shoes and a item rapped in aluminum foil, the fellow officer heard the defendant’s whisper in Spanish “they are going to find it.” After retrieving the foil they noticed a white powdery substance, it was later discovered as crack cocaine. The police acted as how they were supposed to now there is limited grounds on whether they could have conducted a search. The court denied the defendants