Search results
5 mar 2019 · Case Summary of New York v. Quarles: After officers received a description of an assailant, one officer followed the suspect into a supermarket. Spotting respondent Quarles (the suspect), the officer ordered him to stop. The officer frisked Quarles and discovered that he was wearing an empty shoulder holster.
Brief Fact Summary. After being stopped and frisked, revealing an empty shoulder holster, respondent Benjamin Quarles said “the gun is over there” in response to an officer’s question about its whereabouts. Only then did the officer give the respondent his Miranda warnings. Synopsis of Rule of Law.
New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court regarding the public safety exception to the normal Fifth Amendment requirements of the Miranda warning.
New York v. Quarles. No. 82-1213. Argued January 18, 1984. Decided June 12, 1984. 467 U.S. 649. Syllabus. Respondent was charged in a New York state court with criminal possession of a weapon.
In Quarles, a woman reported to a police officer that a man with a gun had raped her and entered a grocery store. In the store, the officer saw a man matching the description of the suspect and handcuffed him. After a frisk search revealed no gun, the officer asked him where the gun was located.
29 kwi 2019 · On September 11, 1980 officer Frank Kraft entered an A&P supermarket while on patrol in Queens, New York. He identified a man, Benjamin Quarles, who matched the description of an assailant armed with a gun.
After receiving the description of Quarles, an alleged assailant, a police officer entered a supermarket, spotted him, and ordered him to stop. Quarles stopped and was frisked by the officer. Upon detecting an empty shoulder holster, the officer asked Quarles where his gun was.
