Peoplev.Jimenez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth DepartmentFeb 2, 1996
637 N.Y.S.2d 548 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
637 N.Y.S.2d 548224 A.D.2d 1002

February 2, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Doyle, J.

Present — Lawton, J.P., Fallon, Callahan, Balio and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that Supreme Court should have granted his motion to suppress. We disagree. The record of the suppression hearing shows that, while walking toward a restaurant to perform a premises investigation check, an officer of the Rochester Police Department observed defendant walking in a lot next to the restaurant. When defendant saw the officer, he fled to the rear of the lot and hid behind a dumpster. When the officer walked into the lot toward defendant, he observed defendant peering out at him from behind the dumpster. Defendant opened the lid of the dumpster, threw a brown paper bag inside, and walked out from behind it. The officer asked defendant to stop and answer some questions, and he asked another officer at the scene to retrieve the brown paper bag from the dumpster. Inside the bag were 11 baggies containing what appeared to be cocaine. Defendant was then placed under arrest.

We agree with the suppression court that the officer's conduct was reasonable and did not constitute an illegal pursuit of defendant (see generally, People v. Hill, 127 A.D.2d 144, 145-149, lv granted 69 N.Y.2d 888, appeal dismissed 70 N.Y.2d 795; see also, People v. Leung, 68 N.Y.2d 734; People v. Howard, 50 N.Y.2d 583, cert denied 449 U.S. 1023). Moreover, by placing the bag inside the dumpster, defendant relinquished any possessory interest in it and, therefore, lacks standing to challenge its seizure (see, People v. Stevens, 129 A.D.2d 749; see also, People v. Sharrieff, 117 A.D.2d 635, 636, lv dismissed 67 N.Y.2d 950).

We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.