Opinion
December 22, 1995
Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Smith, J.
Present — Denman, P.J., Lawton, Balio and Davis, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of burglary in the second degree and petit larceny, for which he was sentenced as a second felony offender to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 6 to 12 years and one year respectively. Defendant contends that County Court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence on Fourth Amendment grounds; that the evidence is insufficient and the verdict is against the weight of the evidence; and that the sentence is harsh and excessive.
Defendant's motion to suppress was properly denied. The police officer had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity sufficient to justify his pursuit of defendant (see, People v Martinez, 80 N.Y.2d 444, 446-448). It is well settled that "[f]light, combined with other specific circumstances indicating that the suspect may be engaged in criminal activity, could provide the predicate necessary to justify pursuit" (People v Holmes, 81 N.Y.2d 1056, 1058; see, People v Matienzo, 81 N.Y.2d 778; People v Martinez, supra, at 448; People v Leung, 68 N.Y.2d 734, 736). Moreover, the subsequent detention and transporting of defendant to the crime scene were justified by such reasonable suspicion and, additionally, by the factors identified in People v Hicks ( 68 N.Y.2d 234, 240-244, citing United States v Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675, 682-686). After transporting him back to the crime scene, the officer acquired probable cause to arrest defendant based on the showup identifications of defendant by the victim and her neighbor; the identification by the victim of her property; the statement of the victim that defendant had no permission to enter her house or take her property; and the physical evidence of a break-in.
We have considered the remaining contentions of defendant and conclude that they are without merit.