People v. Destine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Destine

216 A.D.2d 127, 629 N.Y.S.2d 205, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6561

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 20, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 216 A.D.2d 127 (People v. Destine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Destine, 216 A.D.2d 127, 629 N.Y.S.2d 205, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6561 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Sheridan, J.), rendered July 14, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing her, as a second felony offender, to a term of A1h to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The testimony of the experienced observing officer and the arresting officer established that they were working as a team in the vicinity of the Port Authority, an area known for illegal drug activity (People v King, 200 AD2d 487, 488, lv denied 83 NY2d 873), when the first officer observed an unapprehended man hand money to defendant, whereupon the codefendant, who was standing next to defendant, gave two vials containing crack /cocaine to the man and one vial to the man’s companion, and defendant then gave the companion $1 in change. Where, as here, the observing officer motioned to the second officer to arrest defendant, " 'it [was] not necessary for the officer making the arrest * * * to be, himself, in possession of information sufficient to constitute probable cause provided that he act[ed] upon the direction of or as a result of communication with a * * * brother officer’ who had probable cause to arrest” (Matter of Alton J., 196 AD2d 764, quoting People v Horowitz, 21 NY2d 55, 60). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Asch, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Sheridan, J.), rendered July 14, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing her, as a second felony offender, to a term of A1h to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The testimony of the experienced observing officer and the arresting officer established that they were working as a team in the vicinity of the Port Authority, an area known for illegal drug activity (People v King, 200 AD2d 487, 488, lv denied 83 NY2d 873), when the first officer observed an unapprehended man hand money to defendant, whereupon the codefendant, who was standing next to defendant, gave two vials containing crack /cocaine to the man and one vial to the man’s companion, and defendant then gave the companion $1 in change. Where, as here, the observing officer motioned to the second officer to arrest defendant, " 'it [was] not necessary for the officer making the arrest * * * to be, himself, in possession of information sufficient to constitute probable cause provided that he act[ed] upon the direction of or as a result of communication with a * * * brother officer’ who had probable cause to arrest” (Matter of Alton J., 196 AD2d 764, quoting People v Horowitz, 21 NY2d 55, 60). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Asch, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 127, 629 N.Y.S.2d 205, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-destine-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack