In People v. Chisholm, 180 AD2d 744 (2d Dept. 1992), the defendant was stopped by an officer for the New York State Racing Association as he walked away from a vehicle with a broken window. Two Racing Association detectives were called to the scene. When asked by the detectives what happened to the window, the defendant explained that 1) the vehicle belonged to him and 2) he had broken the window. Although the defendant had no form of identification on his person, he was able to produce the keys to the vehicle and identify items located in the trunk. The defendant was taken to an instigations office where he told the detectives that the vehicle actually belonged to his girlfriend. The detectives called the defendant's girlfriend, who confirmed that the vehicle belonged to her and that the defendant had her permission to use it. The detectives also ran the license plate number and verified ownership of the vehicle. Nonetheless, the detectives again asked the defendant to produce some form of identification. As the defendant pulled his hand out of his pocket, a vial of crack-cocaine fell to the floor. The defendant was arrested and following a search, the detectives discovered seven additional vials of crack-cocaine. In reversing the lower court's denial of the branch of the defendant's motion to suppress physical evidence and statements made by him, the Appellate Division held that "once [the detectives] determined that the vehicle had not been stolen and that the defendant was not guilty of any criminality, any further detention of the defendant was unjustified." (Chisholm, 180 AD2d at 745-746.)