Opinion
March 16, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.).
After the experienced narcotics officer witnessed activity that looked like something was being traded and other suspicious interaction between three men at 1:10 A.M. in an area the officer described as a "drug supermarket", his approach to defendant for inquiry was founded upon a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity (People v. Rivera, 175 A.D.2d 78, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 1129). Defendant's abandonment of the bag was not in response to unlawful police conduct, and the vials found inside provided the officer with probable cause for defendant's arrest (People v Matienzo, 81 N.Y.2d 778; People v. Boodle, 47 N.Y.2d 398, cert denied 444 U.S. 969). Consequently, his statements were also not the product of illegal police activity (see, People v. King, 200 A.D.2d 487, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 873) and were admissible as spontaneous declarations (People v. Maerling, 46 N.Y.2d 289, 302-303).
We decline to disturb defendant's bargained-for sentence which was neither harsh nor excessive.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Rubin, Ross and Tom, JJ.