Opinion
November 13, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Berkowitz, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Suppression of physical evidence was properly denied. At the suppression hearing, a police officer testified that he saw the defendant engaged in conversation with another individual in an area where there had been numerous prior drug-related arrests. He testified that he observed the defendant pass a glassine envelope to the other man in exchange for a sum of money, and that the other man then tasted the contents of the package. Under these circumstances, the officer had every reason to conclude that he had just witnessed an illicit drug sale so that there was probable cause to arrest the defendant and to conduct a search incident to that arrest (see, People v. McRay, 51 N.Y.2d 594; People v. Figueroa, 134 A.D.2d 277; People v. Luccioni, 120 A.D.2d 617; People v. Bittner, 97 A.D.2d 33).
We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Kunzeman, Kooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.