Opinion
2000-01250
Argued November 27, 2001.
December 17, 2001.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (McKay, J.), rendered January 31, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, sexual abuse in the first degree (two counts), and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification evidence.
Andrew C. Fine, New York, N.Y. (Lorraine Maddalo of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Sholom J. Twersky of counsel; Elliot Alony on the brief), for respondent.
Before: WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, THOMAS A. ADAMS, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the conduct of the police was justified at its inception and reasonably related in scope to the circumstances (see, People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210, 223; People v. Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181).
The defendant's behavior, coupled with the information available to the police at the time, justified the police detaining him for approximately six to seven minutes to await the arrival of the complainant (see, People v. Hicks, 68 N.Y.2d 234; People v. Byrd, 163 A.D.2d 407; People v. Williams, 150 A.D.2d 410). The complainant's unequivocal on-the-scene identification of the defendant gave the police probable cause to arrest him (see, People v. Talley, 256 A.D.2d 600; People v. Williams, supra). Accordingly, the identification testimony was properly found admissible.
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
FRIEDMANN, J.P., SMITH, ADAMS and TOWNES, JJ., concur.