People v. Myrick
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Turner, Jr., J.), rendered April 13, 1992, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.
In the late evening of November 7, 1990, City of Albany Police Detective Charles Krikorian received a telephone call from a confidential informant, who advised that he had just left 102 Lark Street where he had observed defendant in possession of cocaine which defendant was selling. He also advised Krikorian that defendant might be armed. The informant was known to be reliable in that he had previously provided information to the police which led to the seizure of controlled substances and resulted in arrests and convictions. Defendant previously had been identified to the Albany Police by New Jersey authorities as Herman Myrick.
Armed with this information, Krikorian took up surveillance and radioed fellow detectives Angelo Siciliano and Sean Keane advising them of the information he had received. On November 8, 1990 at approximately 2:50 a.m., he again radioed Siciliano and Keane advising that defendant had just left 102 Lark Street and was proceeding west on Orange Street with several other persons. Siciliano and Keane drove up Orange Street, spotted defendant and radioed the dispatcher for backup stating that they intended to stop defendant to check him out for drugs. Two additional Albany police officers,
Defendant was subsequently indicted for and convicted of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fifth degrees for which he was sentenced to concurrent terms of incarceration of 8⅓ to 25 years and 2⅓ to 7 years, respectively. This appeal ensued.
On this appeal, defendant contends that County Court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence seized at police headquarters because the police were without sufficient basis to take him into custody. Defendant reasons that the information conveyed to Krikorian was insufficient to justify the initial stop in that the informant’s reliability was not established in accordance with the dictates of Spinelli v United States (393 US 410) and, in any event, that the People failed to establish that the arresting officers themselves possessed the requisite knowledge justifying the initial seizure of defendant. We disagree.
Krikorian testified at the Mapp hearing that the informant previously had given information which resulted in arrests and convictions, thus satisfying the reliability prong of the Aguilar-Spinelli inquiry (see, People v Hendricks, 25 NY2d 129, 133), and we have consistently held that the actions of a police officer may be based upon the knowledge or information of a fellow officer engaged in a common investigation (see, People v Slater, 173 AD2d 1024, 1026, lv denied 78 NY2d 974; People v Cuyler, 44 AD2d 881, 882). Here, the police possessed information which provided them with a reasonable suspicion that a crime had been or was being committed, thus justifying the forcible stop of defendant (see, People v Martinez, 80 NY2d
Weiss, P. J., Cardona, White and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.