{"id":9845,"date":"2014-01-04T08:37:45","date_gmt":"2013-11-22T16:18:48","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2013-11-22T16:18:48","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=9845","title":{"rendered":"NY3: Tasering defendant to remove drugs from his mouth raised a Fourth Amendment question of excessive force to search"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Tasering defendant to remove drugs from his mouth raised a Fourth Amendment question of excessive force to search. The trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress without a hearing. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.courts.state.ny.us\/reporter\/3dseries\/2013\/2013_07769.htm\">People v. Atkinson<\/a>, 2013 NY Slip Op 7769, 111 A.D.3d 1061, 975 N.Y.S.2d 227 (3d Dept. 2013):<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>As for the cocaine recovered from defendant&#8217;s mouth after he was tased more than once, defendant raised a question as to whether that evidence was seized from him through the use of excessive force, which requires an analysis &#8220;under the Fourth Amendment&#8217;s &#8216;objective reasonableness&#8217; standard&#8221; (Graham v Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 388 [1989]; accord People v Smith, 95 AD3d 21, 26 [2012]). Defendant&#8217;s affirmation described his version of the arrest and search, and his motion papers asserted that use of a taser constituted excessive force under the circumstances. The People failed to substantively respond to this argument. As the motion papers raised a factual dispute concerning the use of a taser and whether it might be considered excessive force, giving rise to a potentially unreasonable search and seizure that may require suppression of the evidence, a hearing was required (see CPL 710.60 [3]; People v Mendoza, 82 NY2d 415, 426-427 [1993]; compare People v Smith, 95 AD3d at 26, with People v Matherine, 166 AD2d 322, 322-323 [1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 1022 [1990]). We therefore hold this appeal in abeyance pending the completion of a suppression hearing on this issue (see People v Mabeus, 47 AD3d 1073, 1075 [2008]; People v Cole, 187 AD2d 873, 874 [1992]).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=9845\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9845","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9845","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=9845"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9845\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9845"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9845"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9845"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}