Opinion
November 25, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.).
The limited testimony challenged on appeal was not expert opinion and was properly admitted, since it explained why the officers placed defendant and his accomplice under observation in the first place and was probative of the reliability of the officers' observations ( see, People v. Easton, 216 A.D.2d 220, 221, lv denied 87 N.Y.2d 845).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.