Majority
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (McKay, J.), rendered January 31, 2000, convicting him of rob
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the conduct of the police was justified at its inception and reasonably related in scope to the circumstances (see, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210 , 223; People v Hollman, 79 NY2d 181 ).
The defendant’s behavior, coupled with the information available to the police at the time, justified the police detaining him for approximately six to seven minutes to await the arrival of the complainant (see, People v Hicks, 68 NY2d 234 ; People v Byrd, 163 AD2d 407 ; People v Williams, 150 AD2d 410 ). The complainant’s unequivocal on-the-scene identification of the defendant gave the police probable cause to arrest him (see, People v Talley, 256 AD2d 600 ; People v Williams, supra). Accordingly, the identification testimony was properly found admissible.
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 ). Friedmann, J. P., Smith, Adams and Townes, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. De Bour 40 NY2d 210 at 223 p. 426
- People v. Hollman 79 NY2d 181 p. 426
- People v. Hicks 68 NY2d 234 p. 426
- People v. Byrd 163 AD2d 407 p. 426
- People v. Williams 150 AD2d 410 p. 426
- People v. Suitte 90 AD2d 80 p. 426