Opinion
May 7, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Duncan, J.).
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the hearing court correctly determined that his arrest was lawful and that the loaded revolver recovered from him, as well as his custodial statements, were not subject to suppression. In this regard, we note that the fact that the arresting officer drew his gun upon the defendant did not transform an otherwise lawful stop into an arrest (see, People v. Allen, 73 N.Y.2d 378; People v. Chestnut, 51 N.Y.2d 14, cert denied 449 U.S. 1018; People v. Jackson, 158 A.D.2d 545). The ensuing frisk of the defendant, performed after the arresting officer confirmed that a shooting had just occurred, was justified since the officer had a reasonable basis for suspecting that the defendant was armed and he therefore properly exercised caution to ensure his personal safety (see, People v. Allen, supra; People v. Chestnut, supra; People v Jackson, supra; People v. Joyner, 109 A.D.2d 753). Upon the discovery of a loaded revolver on the defendant's person, probable cause existed to effect his arrest (see, People v McEachin, 148 A.D.2d 551).
The defendant's further contention that the court erred in refusing his request to instruct the jury as to the defense of justification is without merit, as no reasonable view of the evidence adduced at trial would support a finding of justification (see, People v. Goetz, 68 N.Y.2d 96; People v Padgett, 60 N.Y.2d 142; People v. Acevedo, 117 A.D.2d 813).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contention and find that it is without merit. Mangano, P.J., Lawrence, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.