Opinion
January 24, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Clifford Scott, J.).
Competent evidence in the record supports the trial court's conclusion that the arresting officer had an adequate description of the defendant, that he had observed defendant's furtive behavior before stopping the defendant without forcibly detaining him, and that he did not arrest the defendant until after the complainant's identification. The arresting officer exercised his common-law right to inquire which was legitimately activated by a founded suspicion that criminal activity was afoot (People v Jackson, 72 A.D.2d 149, 152-153).
Defendant's motion to relieve counsel was properly denied. The defendant's conclusory statements did not give rise to a serious possibility of irreconcilable conflict with his lawyer (People v Sides, 75 N.Y.2d 822, 825). In any case, the record shows that the court did make "some minimal inquiry" (supra, at 825).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Smith, JJ.