Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. The court correctly found that defendant failed to meet his burden of establishing a legitimate expectation of privacy in the premises, where defendant's claim that he was an "overnight guest" in the apartment is unsupported by the record. We see no reason to disturb the court's credibility determinations ( see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761). The evidence, including hearsay rendered admissible by CPL 710.60 (4), established that armed trespassers had taken over the apartment, which was supposed to be vacant, and that defendant's connection with the apartment was entirely that of a trespasser, notwithstanding his claimed relationship with a former tenant ( see, People v. Jose, 252 A.D.2d 401).

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.