| Norasteh v State of New York |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 08114 [44 AD3d 576] |
| October 30, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Payman Norasteh, Appellant, v State of New York,Respondent. |
—[*1] Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Frank K. Walsh of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment of the Court of Claims of the State of New York (Alan C. Marin, J.), entered June27, 2005, dismissing the claim after a nonjury trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Probable cause is a complete defense to an action for false arrest (see Rivera v City of New York, 40AD3d 334 [2007]). As a general rule, information from an identified citizen accusinganother individual of the commission of a specific crime is sufficient to provide the police withprobable cause to arrest (Minott v City of New York, 203 AD2d 265, 267 [1994]). Aperson is guilty of disorderly conduct when, with intent to cause public inconvenience orannoyance, he engages in fighting or violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior, or makesunreasonable noise (see e.g. Penal Law § 240.20 [1], [2]). Here, an attorney whowitnessed the incident described claimant's highly agitated state while on line to see the SmallClaims Court clerk, agitating others on line. Some of those on line alleged that claimant madephysical contact with a woman who tried to reenter the line after sitting down to fill outpaperwork. Claimant's agitated state was witnessed by a court officer responding to thedisturbance, and claimant thereafter refused to cooperate with security personnel. Clearly, a fairinterpretation of the evidence supported the court's finding that the court officers had probablecause to believe claimant was guilty of disorderly conduct (see Gunsberg v State of NewYork, 198 AD2d 59, 60 [1993], lv denied 83 NY2d 751 [1994]).
We have considered claimant's remaining arguments and find them unpersuasive.Concur—Lippman, P.J., Andrias, Williams, Buckley and Kavanagh, JJ. [See 8Misc 3d 1019(A), 2005 NY Slip Op 51187(U).]