| People v Williams |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 04913 [52 AD3d 208] [52 AD3d 208] |
| June 3, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v LindaWilliams, Appellant. |
—[*1] Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Hilary Hassler of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Cataldo, J.), rendered November 20,2006, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing herto a term of 4½ years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. The People established probablecause for defendant's arrest, notwithstanding the absence of testimony from the officers whoinitially detained defendant, given the testimony of the officer who placed defendant under arrestimmediately thereafter. The only reasonable conclusion that could be drawn from the totality ofthe hearing evidence is that defendant was detained based on radio transmissions describing thesuspects (see People v Gonzalez, 91 NY2d 909, 910 [1998]). There is no merit todefendant's suggestion that the type of circumstantial inferences drawn in Gonzalezshould be limited to "buy and bust" cases (see e.g. People v Colon, 39 AD3d 233 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d874 [2007]; People v Dingle, 30AD3d 1121, 1122 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 925 [2006]; People v Myers, 28 AD3d 373[2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 760 [2006]).
The imposition of mandatory surcharges and fees by way of court documents, but withoutmention in the court's oral pronouncement of sentence, was lawful (see People v Harris,[*2]51 AD3d 523 [2008]).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli,Williams, Sweeny and Acosta, JJ.