People v. Clarke

• Decision Date: 13 April 1992
• Citation: 182 A.D.2d 695,582 N.Y.S.2d 731
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Michael CLARKE, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 731

582 N.Y.S.2d 731

182 A.D.2d 695

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Michael CLARKE, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division Second Department.

April 13, 1992.

Gary E. Eisenberg, Monroe, for appellant.

Kenneth Gribetz, Dist. Atty., New City (Reneau J. Longoria, of counsel), for respondent.

Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and ROSENBLATT, MILLER and SANTUCCI, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), rendered October 24, 1988, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and sentencing him to concurrent indeterminate terms of 12 1/2 years to life imprisonment for criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and for each conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and 7 1/2 to 15 years imprisonment for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and a concurrent definite term of 1 year imprisonment for criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree, and directing the defendant to pay restitution in the amount of $100 to the Rockland County Narcotics Task Force. The appeal brings up for review the denial, without a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence seized from the defendant.

ORDERED that the judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating so much of the sentence as directed the defendant to pay restitution to the Rockland County Narcotics Task Force; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends, inter alia, that the physical evidence against him should have been suppressed because the police chased and arrested him without probable cause, and the police improperly searched his motel room the following day without a warrant. We disagree.

The police chased the defendant because they believed him to be Alfred Walker, for whom they had a warrant. When the police called out the name "Walker", the defendant and two other men fled into the room of Linda Ash. Inasmuch as the police had probable cause to arrest Walker, the officers' understandable mistake in chasing and arresting the defendant did not amount to unreasonable action on their part (see, People v. Fabian, 126 A.D.2d 664, 511 N.Y.S.2d 92; Hill v. California, 401 U.S. 797, 91 S.Ct. 1106, 28 L.Ed.2d 484; People v. Howard, 50 N.Y.2d 583, 430 N.Y.S.2d 578, 408 N.E.2d 908 cert. denied 449 U.S. 1023, 101 S.Ct. 590, 66 L.Ed.2d 484). Furthermore, as the defendant and the other two men entered Linda Ash's room, the police heard a gun shot from within the room. Thus, the police had additional probable cause to enter the room (see, People v. Howard, supra ). Moreover, the defendant is without standing to contest the search of Ash's room. Under the circumstances, he had no expectation of privacy while in Ash's room (see, People v. Ponder, 54 N.Y.2d 160, ...