From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Greenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 9, 1992
187 A.D.2d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

November 9, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.).


Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant was indicted under two separate indictments in connection with his sale of drugs to undercover officers on two occasions, one occurring on September 23, 1987, and another occurring on November 11, 1987. We do not agree with the defendant's claim that the hearing court erred in finding that there was probable cause for his arrest after the second sale. The determination of the hearing court, which had the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses, should not be set aside unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761). Here, the defendant sold a quantity of heroin to an undercover officer during a so-called "buy and bust" operation. The undercover officer promptly transmitted the defendant's description to the arresting officers, who arrived at the defendant's building minutes later. One of the officers saw a man fitting the defendant's description running down to the basement, exiting the building, and climbing into a ground floor apartment window. The defendant was not placed under arrest until after he voluntarily left the apartment and was positively identified by the undercover officer in front of the apartment building. We find that the arresting officers properly relied on the description of the defendant given by the undercover officer, and that the record supports the hearing court's determination that there was probable cause for the defendant's arrest (see, People v London, 160 A.D.2d 734).

Further, the record also demonstrates that the police searched the defendant's apartment following his arrest with the consent of his wife, who lived in the apartment. Accordingly, the evidence seized from the apartment was properly admitted into evidence (see, People v Cosme, 48 N.Y.2d 286, 290; People v Matus, 166 A.D.2d 464).

The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Greenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 9, 1992
187 A.D.2d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Greenberg

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JESSEY GREENBERG…

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

Date published: Nov 9, 1992

Citations

187 A.D.2d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
589 N.Y.S.2d 916

Citing Cases

People v. Kocowicz

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the finding of the hearing…

People v. Williams

Currency and drugs were also recovered from the codefendant. The record clearly supports the hearing court's…