— Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, defendant’s motion to suppress granted and indictment dismissed. Memorandum: County Court should have suppressed the burglar’s tools seized from defendant following a frisk and the confession given by defendant after his arrest.
At 12:30 a.m., an hour before the frisk, a police officer observed defendant walking down the street, in an area where numerous burglaries had occurred, carrying a three-foot-long object wrapped in a sheet. When the officer attempted to stop defendant, defendant walked away and went through a yard. When the officer saw defendant one hour later, he approached defendant and conducted a "pat down” search. CPL 140.50 (1) authorizes a police officer to stop a person in a public place and to demand of him an explanation of his conduct when he reasonably suspects that a person has committed a crime. The statute further authorizes the officer to search the person so stopped for a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument when the officer reasonably suspects that he is in danger of physical injury (CPL 140.50 [3]). Assuming that the circumstances created a basis for stopping defendant and making an inquiry, nothing observed by the officer permitted further action, such as a frisk or search, before making an inquiry (see, People v Bronston,