Opinion
June 1, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.).
The report of an unidentified citizen informant of a described person selling drugs at a particular location was sufficient to give the police a right to inquire ( see, People v. Kadan, 195 A.D.2d 174, 178, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 854), and defendant's subsequent conduct observed by the police, which included his making a throwing motion toward his mouth, elevated this to reasonable suspicion ( see, People v. King, 200 A.D.2d 487, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 873).
Denial of defendant's motion to suppress his statements to the police was also proper as the officer's questioning on the scene did not constitute custodial interrogation ( see, People v Huffman, 41 N.Y.2d 29), and defendant's statement in the police vehicle was spontaneous and not preceded by any police questioning ( see, People v. Huffman, 61 N.Y.2d 795). Moreover, since the officer's observations of the bottom of a crack vial in defendant's mouth and vials in defendant's pocket, which we do not find incredible as a matter of law, provided probable cause for defendant's arrest, the statements are not suppressible as fruit of the poisonous tree ( see, Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rubin, Kupferman, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.