People v Hancock

People v Hancock 2010 NY Slip Op 02472 [71 AD3d 566] March 25, 2010 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, April 28, 2010

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

—[*1] Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Robert S. Dean of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Alice Wiseman of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Ward, J., at suppression hearing; Edward J. McLaughlin, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered on or about March 10, 2009, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 1 to 3 years, unanimously reversed, on the law, defendant's motion to suppress physical evidence granted, and the indictment dismissed.

At the suppression proceedings, the only theory relied upon by the People in their argument, and by the court in its decision, was that a forged driver's license recovered from defendant's car after his arrest was admissible under the inevitable discovery doctrine. As the People concede, defendant is entitled to suppression because the inevitable discovery exception does not apply where "the evidence sought to be suppressed is the very evidence obtained in the illegal search" (People v Stith, 69 NY2d 313, 318 [1987]). Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Moskowitz, Freedman, Richter and RomÁn, JJ.