Opinion
May 31, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Patterson, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The information supplied to police officers in a face-to-face meeting with an unidentified informant, together with a police officer's observation of what appeared to be a bulge in the defendant's waistband, provided the police officers with a reasonable suspicion that the defendant had committed a crime involving a weapon (see, People v. Arthurs, 24 N.Y.2d 688; People v. Irizarry, 177 A.D.2d 457; People v. Sattan, 200 A.D.2d 640; People v. Price, 194 A.D.2d 634; People v. Thorne, 184 A.D.2d 797; People v. DeJesus, 169 A.D.2d 521; People v. Castro, 115 A.D.2d 433, affd 68 N.Y.2d 850). The reasonable suspicion justified not only the stop but the frisk (see, People v. Sattan, supra). "Since the lawful frisk produced a gun providing probable cause for the defendant's arrest" (People v. Thorne, supra, at 798), the court properly denied suppression. Furthermore, by pleading guilty, the defendant effectively waived appellate review of any alleged Rosario violations (see, People v. Sebastian, 197 A.D.2d 647; People v. West, 184 A.D.2d 743). Mangano, P.J., Thompson, O'Brien and Florio, JJ., concur.