Opinion
May 29, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Pitaro, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The description provided by a citizen who asserted that someone attempted to steal his bag, in conjunction with the defendant's suspicious behavior, provided the police officers with a sufficient predicate upon which to stop the defendant and question him regarding his identity (see, People v Carrasquillo, 54 N.Y.2d 248; People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210; People v. Springer, 92 A.D.2d 209). The defendant's sudden hand movement toward his jacket pocket, which occurred after he had given contradictory information in response to the police officers' questions regarding his address, caused one of the police officers to become fearful for his physical safety. The police officer then acted reasonably by grabbing the defendant's hand (see, People v. Allen, 73 N.Y.2d 378; People v. Herrar, 120 A.D.2d 614). It was while engaging in this lawful conduct that the officer felt a bulge in the defendant's pocket. The officer discovered the bulge was a quantity of cocaine. Based upon the foregoing, we conclude that the defendant's motion to suppress this cocaine, as well as the cocaine subsequently found in his boots and the incriminating statements he made at the station house, was properly denied. Mangano, P.J., Brown, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.