Summary
holding that juvenile's initial attempts to evade the police, plus his "vague and evasive responses to questions regarding his presence in the building and fail[ure] to provide the officer with a valid reason for being there despite receiving ample opportunity to do so," gave rise to probable cause that he was trespassing
Summary of this case from Greene v. BryanOpinion
April 6, 1998
Appeal from the Family Court, Kings County (Segal, J.).
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the appellant's contention, there was ample evidence to support the Family Court's determination that his arrest for criminal trespass was supported by probable cause. The hearing testimony of the arresting officer established, inter alia, that the appellant was present in a housing project building which was posted with a sign prohibiting trespassing and loitering, that the housing project was known to have a high rate of crime, and that the appellant appeared nervous and initially attempted to avoid the officer. Moreover, the appellant gave vague and evasive responses to questions regarding his presence in the building and failed to provide the officer with a valid reason for being there despite receiving ample opportunity to do so. Under these circumstances, the arrest was lawful, and the Family Court properly denied suppression of the drugs recovered from the appellant during a search incident thereto ( see, People v. Babarcich, 166 A.D.2d 655; People v. Smith, 139 A.D.2d 783; Matter of Troy F., 138 A.D.2d 707).
Miller, J.P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Friedmann, JJ., concur.