| People v Soscia |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 05193 [96 AD3d 1081] |
| June 27, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Matthew Soscia, Appellant. |
—[*1] Janet DiFiore, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (William C. Milaccio and Steven A.Bender of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County(Lorenzo, J.), rendered January 5, 2011, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon inthe third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings upfor review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion whichwas to suppress physical evidence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
A police officer patrolling in a marked police car in a high-crime area at around 1:40 a.m.observed hand-to-hand contact between a man, later identified as the defendant, and a woman,who were standing together with two other males. The area was known as one in which narcoticssales frequently occurred, and for this reason, as well as the nature of the hand-to-handmovement, the officer suspected a drug transaction. As the officer approached the group, thewoman walked away, despite the officer's request for identification. The officer requestedidentification from the remaining three men; the two bystander males complied, and the officerrecognized them from previous arrests for weapons possession. The defendant, however, did notrespond to the officer's request for identification, but stood with his hands in his pockets. Uponthe officer's request for identification, to state whether he had a weapon, and to remove his handsfrom his pockets, the defendant fled. The officer pursued him to the rear of a residence, where thedefendant encountered a fence which prevented his further flight. The defendant then placedsome objects on the ground, and was overtaken and handcuffed. The officer then recovered thediscarded objects, which included a knife.
The hearing court properly determined that the arresting police officer had a foundedsuspicion that the defendant was engaged in criminal activity, triggering the common-law right ofinquiry, which, by virtue of the defendant's flight, ripened into reasonable suspicion to pursue(see People v Sierra, 83 NY2d 928 [1994]; People v Matienzo, 81 NY2d 778,780 [1993]; People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210, 222-223 [1976]; People v Britt, 67 AD3d 1023,1024 [2009]; People v Wynn, 25AD3d 576, 577 [2006]). Because the pursuit of the defendant was justified, the knife hediscarded during the pursuit was not subject to suppression as the result of unlawful policebehavior (see People v Sierra, 83 NY2d 928 [1994]; People [*2]v Britt, 67 AD3d at 1024; People v Wynn, 25 AD3d at577; People v Riley, 290 AD2d 568 [2002]).
Accordingly, the hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibusmotion which was to suppress physical evidence. Dillon, J.P., Balkin, Eng and Chambers, JJ.,concur.