| People v Michimani |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 01686 [115 AD3d 528] |
| March 18, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Alvaro Michimani, Also Known as Alvaro Garcia,Appellant. |
—[*1] Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Melanie A. Sarver of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Seth L. Marvin, J. at suppression hearing;Raymond L. Bruce, J. at jury trial and sentencing), rendered November 14, 2011,convicting defendant of robbery in the second degree and bail jumping in the firstdegree, and sentencing him to consecutive terms of six years and one to three years,unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weightof the evidence (see People vDanielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing thejury's determinations concerning credibility and identification. The evidence clearlyestablished that defendant was a participant in a robbery.
The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. Shortly after midnight,officers received a radio transmission of "shots fired," followed by a transmissiondescribing a group of 8 to 10 men. In very close temporal and spacial proximity to thetransmissions and the specified location, the officers saw a group of men, alone on adeserted street, matching the description in several respects including number, age andethnicity. This provided, at least, a founded suspicion justifying a common-law inquiry.The bounds of such an inquiry were not exceeded when, as a safety precaution, thegreatly outnumbered officers, who did not draw their weapons, directed the group to stopand line up along a storefront (see People v Bora, 83 NY2d 531, 531-535 [1994];People v Francois, 61AD3d 524, 525 [1st Dept 2009], affd 14 NY3d 732 [2010]; People vHerold, 282 AD2d 1, 7 [1st Dept 2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 682 [2001]).Defendant then fled, and we conclude that his flight was not the product of any unlawfulpolice conduct. Defendant's flight, coupled with the other circumstances, providedreasonable suspicion justifying pursuit (see People v Woods, 98 NY2d 627[2002]; People v Cintron, 304 AD2d 454 [1st Dept 2003], lv denied 100NY2d 579 [2003]), followed by a brief investigatory detention. The subsequent recoveryof a firearm from along the path of defendant's flight provided probable cause for hisarrest (see id. at 454), which resulted in the recovery of additional evidence.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P.,Sweeny, Andrias, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.