Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. REYNOLDS

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department.
Jun 9, 1995
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his guilty plea of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. Defendant contends that the People failed to establish that reasonable suspicion existed to justify the stop of the vehicle in which he was a passenger, and that all evidence derived therefrom should have been suppressed.

We agree with the People that defendant, a mere passenger in the vehicle, failed to establish a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle and therefore lacks standing to challenge its search (see, People v. Ponder, 54 N.Y.2d 160, 164-166). Defendant was charged in the indictment and bill of particulars with constructive possession of a weapon pursuant to Penal Law § 265.02 (4). The People did not charge defendant with the statutory presumption of possession in Penal Law § 265.15 (3). Thus, contrary to defendant's contention, the automatic standing rule does not apply (see, People v. Wesley, 73 N.Y.2d 351, 360-364; People v. Millan, 69 N.Y.2d 514).