Opinion
September 29, 1986
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (White, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
The hearsay information from a citizen to the police that the defendant was in possession of and dealing in "smoke" at a specific location provided the necessary "`objective credible reason'" which justified the police approach of the defendant (People v Leung, 68 N.Y.2d 734, 736; People v Landy, 59 N.Y.2d 369). The defendant's immediate flight in an area known for a high incidence of drug sales upon the approach of the detective who had arrested him several times before, coupled with the citizen's information, "establish[ed] the necessary reasonable suspicion that the defendant had committed, or was about to commit a crime, such that pursuit by the officers was justified" (People v Leung, 68 N.Y.2d 734, 736, supra; People v De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210). The retrieval by the police of a pouch suspected of containing marihuana, which had been discarded by the defendant during his flight, provided the necessary probable cause to arrest him.
In any event, the record supports a finding that the defendant abandoned the pouch (see, People v Howard, 50 N.Y.2d 583, 593, cert denied 449 U.S. 1023). Unlike the defendant in People v Howard (supra), the abandonment here was "an independent act involving a calculated risk" (People v Boodle, 47 N.Y.2d 398, 404, cert denied 444 U.S. 969) and evidenced an intent on the part of the defendant to "purposefully [divest] himself of possession" of the pouch (People v Howard, supra, at p 593).
Since the defendant's arrest was proper, the subsequent search of his person, which revealed a blackjack, was lawful as an incident to the arrest. Additionally, the record supports Criminal Term's finding that the defendant's statement to the police was voluntarily made after he was given his Miranda warnings. Accordingly, suppression of the blackjack and the defendant's statement was properly denied. Mollen, P.J., Lazer, Mangano and Lawrence, JJ., concur.