PEOPLE v. GOMEZ (2000)

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of marihuana in the first degree (Penal Law § 221.30).   On July 9, 1998, the police interviewed an informant whom they had just found in possession of a large quantity of marihuana.   The informant agreed to contact his supplier, defendant, to set up a meeting and called defendant from the police station.   The informant gave the police a description of defendant and his vehicle, and said that defendant would probably be with a female passenger.   Defendant was to drive into a designated corner of a hotel parking lot between 6:30 and 7:00 P.M. the following evening.   The police set up surveillance on July 10, 1998 and, at approximately 7:00 P.M., they observed a vehicle matching the description provided by the informant enter the designated area of the parking lot.   Defendant was driving and had a female passenger.   After defendant parked the vehicle, the police arrested him as he exited his vehicle and searched his person, retrieving, among other things, a beeper and $2,000 in cash.   A trained K-9 dog then sniffed around the vehicle and gave a positive indication that there were drugs in the vehicle.   The police obtained a warrant to search the vehicle, where they found over 10 pounds of marihuana in a seat compartment.

 Defendant moved to suppress the pager, money, and marihuana on the grounds that the police lacked reasonable suspicion to use a dog to sniff around his vehicle and lacked probable cause to search him.   Supreme Court properly denied the motion.   The police had a reasonable suspicion that marihuana would be found in the vehicle, thus justifying the use of the dog to sniff around the vehicle (see, People v. Dunn, 77 N.Y.2d 19, 26, 563 N.Y.S.2d 388, 564 N.E.2d 1054, cert. denied 501 U.S. 1219, 111 S.Ct. 2830, 115 L.Ed.2d 1000).   In addition, the police had probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed to support defendant's arrest before the dog sniff, thus justifying the search of defendant's person (see generally, People v. Martinez, 80 N.Y.2d 444, 447, 591 N.Y.S.2d 823, 606 N.E.2d 951;  People v. Rodriguez, 52 N.Y.2d 483, 488-489, 438 N.Y.S.2d 754, 420 N.E.2d 946).

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: