IN THE MATTER OF ANTOINE W., A PERSON ALLEGED TO BE A JUVENILE DELINQUENT, RESPONDENT. (PRESENTMENT AGENCY, APPELLANT.)

79 N.Y.2d 888, 590 N.E.2d 233, 581 N.Y.S.2d 648 (1992).
February 20, 1992

1 No. 4
Decided February 20, 1992

This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports.

Stephen J. McGrath, for Appellant.
Kenneth Rabb, for Respondent.

MEMORANDUM:

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Although the police had an "objective credible reason" for approaching the defendant, the pointed questioning regarding the ownership of the bag and consent to search it was improper because it was not based on a founded suspicion of criminal activity (People v DeBour, 40 NY2d 210, 215). Because the defendant's consent was a product of the improper police inquiry, the Appellate Division erred when it found that the defendant had consented to the search of his bag (see, People v Hollman, ___ NY2d ___ [decided today]).

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Titone, Hancock and Bellacosa concur. Judge Alexander took no part.

IN THE MATTER OF ANTOINE W., A PERSON ALLEGED TO BE A JUVENILE DELINQUENT, RESPONDENT. (PRESENTMENT AGENCY, APPELLANT.)

79 N.Y.2d 888, 590 N.E.2d 233, 581 N.Y.S.2d 648 (1992). February 20, 1992

79 N.Y.2d 888, 590 N.E.2d 233, 581 N.Y.S.2d 648 (1992).
February 20, 1992