From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Reyes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 1993
191 A.D.2d 467 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

March 1, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Naro, J.).


Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant and the codefendant were convicted of two gunpoint robberies. One robbery occurred at a liquor store on the evening of November 12, 1984. The other robbery of a livery cab driver and his vehicle, occurred on the following morning.

Contrary to the defendant's argument on appeal, there was probable cause for the police officer to effect a warrantless arrest of the defendant. It is well settled that probable cause to arrest exists when the facts and circumstances, viewed together, would lead a reasonable person, possessing the same expertise as the arresting officer, to conclude that an offense was committed and that the person arrested was the perpetrator (see, People v. Carrasquillo, 54 N.Y.2d 248; People v. Javier, 175 A.D.2d 182; People v. Rivera, 166 A.D.2d 678).

The police obtained fairly detailed descriptions of the perpetrators of the liquor store robbery from both the owner of the store and from his son who, unnoticed by the robbers, observed them as they fled the scene of the crime. The son was also able to provide the police with the license plate of the car in which the robbers fled. After interviewing the owner of the "getaway" car, the police obtained, inter alia, the names of the individuals who were in possession of the car at the time the robbery was committed, as well as further descriptions which conformed to those provided by the victims of the robbery. Under these circumstances, there was probable cause to believe that the defendants had committed the crime for which they were arrested (see, People v. Bigelow, 66 N.Y.2d 417; People v. Carrasquillo, supra; People v. Witherspoon, 115 A.D.2d 572). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress statements made by the defendant to law enforcement officials, identification testimony, and physical evidence.

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Thompson, J.P., Sullivan, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Reyes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 1993
191 A.D.2d 467 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Reyes

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALEXANDER REYES…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 1, 1993

Citations

191 A.D.2d 467 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
594 N.Y.S.2d 55

Citing Cases

People v. Matthews

The decision to consolidate indictments under CPL 200.20 (4) is committed to the sound discretion of the…

People v. Holley

Here, the conduct of defendant's girlfriend when the police arrived at her apartment established that she…