# Amherst Police - Sick a duck. **URL:** \ **Category:** NYSpeed Off Topic\ **Created:** [February 25, 2008, 9:25pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/amherst-police-sick-a-duck/44029 "2008-02-25T21:25:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 104
**Author:** ![nappy1380](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/nappy1380/32/7502_2.png) [@nappy1380](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/nappy1380)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2008, 8:41am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/amherst-police-sick-a-duck/44029/104 "2008-02-27T08:41:33Z")
No i’m still right. He didn’t have cooperation from the adjoining jurisdiction and was going after a minor violation. > [@](#): > > While this argument appears logical, the Court noted that the geographic limitations placed on the authority of police officers by CPL § 140.10[2] were clear, and that “_t is not the function of this Court to second guess the wisdom of the Legislature,” Graham, supra, at p. 530. The Court ruled that the officer had no authority to arrest the defendant on **[I]petty offenses**_, and that all evidence of misdemeanor or felony offenses derived from the officer’s unauthorized stop of the defendant was “fruit of the poisonous tree.” As a result, the Court dismissed the indictment. Saying “So if you get pulled over in the S. Bound lane by Amherst and never caused the infraction in Amherst tell them to eat a dick, they are out of their jurisdiction.” is absurd. Look at your violations. They are more of a hassle to the court than anything. If this were 15/20 over or a DUI/DWI… keep dreaming. The judge would have agreed with CPL § 20.50(2) and CPL § 140.10[2] would not apply. --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/amherst-police-sick-a-duck/44029)._