Opinion
September 28, 1993
Appeal from the Family Court, New York County (Michael Gage, J.).
From the testimony of the arresting officer and his partner who had witnessed the sale and directed the arrest, the court could properly infer that the officers were working as a team (see, Matter of Robert S., 159 A.D.2d 358, appeal dismissed 76 N.Y.2d 770). "[I]t is not necessary for the officer making the arrest * * * to be, himself, in possession of information sufficient to constitute probable cause provided that he acts upon the direction of or as a result of communication with a * * * brother officer" who had probable cause to arrest (People v Horowitz, 21 N.Y.2d 55, 60).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.