Opinion
6056 Ind. 4695/14
03-22-2018
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Allen GORIS, Defendant–Appellant.
The DeMarco Law Firm, PLLC, Forest Hills (Enrico Demarco of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Alan Gadlin of counsel), for respondent.
The DeMarco Law Firm, PLLC, Forest Hills (Enrico Demarco of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Alan Gadlin of counsel), for respondent.
Tom, J.P., Webber, Oing, Moulton, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Gregory Carro, J.), rendered September 15, 2016, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. Under the particular circumstances present, the police were justified in conducting a limited protective sweep of defendant's apartment following his arrest on the ground floor of the building (see Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325, 110 S.Ct. 1093, 108 L.Ed.2d 276 [1990] ; People v. Febus, 157 A.D.2d 380, 556 N.Y.S.2d 1000 [1st Dept. 1990], appeal dismissed 77 N.Y.2d 835, 567 N.Y.S.2d 203, 568 N.E.2d 652 [1991] ). The police saw defendant selling pills to another person just inside the building's entrance, and they previously observed numerous people being "buzzed in" to the building and then emerging seconds later. Accordingly, the officers reasonably suspected that defendant was selling drugs out of his apartment. Having gone to the apartment at defendant's direction, after he was arrested, so that defendant's girlfriend could provide them with defendant's identification, the officers were reasonably concerned that the girlfriend, who knew of defendant's arrest, might destroy or dispose of evidence, and pose a danger to their safety. Therefore, they were entitled to enter the apartment to monitor her movements as she retrieved the identification. In doing so, the officers saw contraband in plain view, and then secured the apartment and obtained a warrant.
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining arguments.