Opinion
October 20, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.).
Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. The report of a citizen informant moments after the robbery, giving the perpetrator's direction of flight, coupled with another citizen informant's pointing to defendant as the man running and the officers' immediate observation of defendant, who was the only person running in close proximity in the given direction, provided the arresting officers with, at least, reasonable suspicion to believe defendant had, moments earlier, committed the robbery ( People v. Jones, 238 A.D.2d 153, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 906), notwithstanding the absence of any physical description of the assailant ( People v. Dickerson, 238 A.D.2d 147, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 857). The ensuing gunpoint stop, frisk, forcible detention and brief transportation of defendant to the crime scene, where the citizen informant identified him as the robber, was justified ( see, People v. Hammonds, 215 A.D.2d 166, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 795; People v. Thomas, 247 A.D.2d 284).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
Concur — Lerner, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.