96 N.Y.2d 521 (2001)
A police request for information from all passengers on a bus requires an objective, credible reason particularized to those passengers, not just a general belief that the bus’s origin is a drug source city.
Summary
This case concerns the legality of a drug interdiction effort by police on a commercial bus. An investigator boarded a bus arriving from New York City and asked all passengers to produce tickets and identification. Based on the fact that the bus came from New York City, deemed a narcotics source, the Appellate Division found the request acceptable. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the request was unlawful. The Court reasoned that asking all passengers for documentation required a specific, articulable reason beyond the bus’s origin, and that the evidence obtained from the defendant following this request should have been suppressed.
Facts
An investigator boarded a bus arriving from New York City at 3:30 AM. He announced a drug interdiction effort and asked all fifteen passengers to produce bus tickets and identification. The investigator observed the defendant and a companion pushing a black object between them. He asked for their identification and tickets. The investigator obtained consent to search defendant’s bag and found a digital scale. The investigator then found cocaine in a jacket belonging to the defendant.
Procedural History
The defendant was indicted for criminal possession of a controlled substance. The County Court denied the defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence. The defendant pleaded guilty. The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction. The New York Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal.
Issue(s)
Whether a police request for all passengers on a bus to produce tickets and identification is justified solely by the fact that the bus originated from a city known as a source of narcotics.
Holding
No, because the request was not supported by an objective, credible reason particularized to the passengers, but instead was based on a generalized suspicion due to the bus’s origin.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court applied the four-tiered framework from People v. De Bour to assess the police encounter. The initial request for all passengers to produce documentation triggered De Bour scrutiny. The Court stated, “If a police officer seeks simply to request information from an individual, that request must be supported by an objective, credible reason, not necessarily indicative of criminality.” The Court emphasized that while police have broad authority to ask questions, they cannot do so on mere whim. The Court distinguished this case from others where encounters were justified by specific conduct or information linking individuals to criminal activity. “In determining the legality of an encounter under De Bour and Hollman, it has been crucial whether a nexus to conduct existed, that is, whether the police were aware of or observed conduct which provided a particularized reason to request information.” The Court found that the bus’s origin was insufficient justification. “Here, the record does not reflect any reason for the request of all passengers to produce their tickets and identification, other than the fact the bus had departed from a place described by the investigator as ‘known as a source city for narcotics.’” The Court also stated that the subsequent observation of the defendant pushing a black object did not legitimize the earlier request, as an encounter cannot be validated retroactively. The court concluded that the procedure employed by the police violated the defendant’s rights, making the subsequent search unlawful. Judge Smith concurred, emphasizing that the police action constituted an unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment and the New York State Constitution, as a reasonable person would not have felt free to decline the officers’ requests.