| People v Verges |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 06037 [120 AD3d 1028] |
| September 4, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Augustine Verges, Appellant. |
Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (David Crow of counsel), andKirkland & Ellis LLP, New York (Leopoldo Yanez of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Sheila L. Bautista of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered July 13,2011, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weaponin the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of two to four years, unanimouslyaffirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress a knife and statements hemade to the police. Police officers patrolling a New York City Housing Authoritybuilding saw defendant try to enter the building as the man in front of him, whom he didnot appear to know, opened the door after being buzzed into the building. Defendant didnot have a key out, and he was not seen using the buzzer system himself. Althoughdefendant suggests that the officers approached him as he merely stood behind the otherman, they actually observed him attempting to enter, in a manner inconsistent with that ofa resident or invitee, and apparently without authorization.
Defendant's inability to provide the name or apartment number of the person he waspurportedly visiting, or any other innocent explanation, provided probable cause to arresthim for attempted criminal trespass (see e.g. People v Wighfall, 55 AD3d 347 [1st Dept 2008],lv denied 11 NY3d 931 [2009]; People v Hendricks, 43 AD3d 361, 363-364 [1st Dept2007]). Thus, the search of defendant's pocket was permitted as a search incident to alawful arrest. The fact that the search occurred first is of no moment (see People vEvans, 43 NY2d 160, 166 [1977] ["It [*2]may besaid that the search and arrest must constitute a single res gestae. The fact that the searchprecedes the formal arrest is irrelevant as long as the search and arrest are nearlysimultaneous so as to constitute one event" (emphasis omitted)]).Concur—Acosta, J.P., DeGrasse, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels and Feinman, JJ.