Summary
determining probable cause existed where an experienced narcotics officer observed a known drug dealer exchange an unidentified object for money in a drug-prone location
Summary of this case from State v. McLeodOpinion
01-31-2017
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Rodney SPENCER, Defendant–Appellant.
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Arielle Reid of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Frank Glaser of counsel), for respondent.
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Arielle Reid of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Frank Glaser of counsel), for respondent.
FRIEDMAN, J.P., RENWICK, SAXE, GISCHE, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jill Konviser, J., at suppression hearing; Michael Sonberg, at plea and sentencing), rendered June 23, 2015, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of tampering with physical evidence, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 1 ½ to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress physical evidence, identification testimony and one of his statements to the police. An officer with extensive experience in narcotics arrests observed defendant, a known drug dealer, conduct a hand-to-hand exchange of an unidentified object in exchange for currency in a drug–prone location. The officer had also learned from an officer in an observation post that defendant had met with the buyer in a nearby park and directed the buyer to the parking garage where the sale was consummated. Based on the officer's training and experience, he recognized the overall pattern of behavior as characteristic of a drug transaction, regardless of whether the object was specifically recognizable as drugs or drug packaging (see People v. Jones, 90 N.Y.2d 835, 837, 660 N.Y.S.2d 549, 683 N.E.2d 14 [1997] ; People v. Selby, 82 A.D.3d 433, 434, 917 N.Y.S.2d 861 [1st Dept.2011], lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 801, 929 N.Y.S.2d 109, 952 N.E.2d 1104 [2011] ).
Additionally, there is no basis for disturbing the credibility determinations of the hearing court, which are supported by the record (see People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380 [1977] ).