Defendant was apprehended after he and his accomplice, Yasmin Weaver, attempted to use a stolen credit card at a department store. Defendant had persuaded Ms. Weaver to use the stolen credit cards. At trial, defendant admitted that he fabricated the explanations he gave to the store officials regarding the credit cards.

Defendant urges that his accomplice's testimony was insufficiently corroborated. However, the evidence provided by the sales floor supervisor and the store detective more than adequately connected defendant with the crime and enabled the court to reasonably determine that Ms. Weaver was telling the truth. (See, People v. Daniels, 37 N.Y.2d 624.) Defendant's false exculpatory stories, combined with both the direct testimonial evidence of Ms. Weaver and the corroborative evidence, were sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

We also reject defendant's second argument that his counsel was inadequate and ineffective and that his rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution were violated. The sole ground alleged for this contention is that defendant's counsel failed to move to suppress physical evidence, specifically a credit card, taken from his person. It is clear, however, that the card was taken from his person not by the police, but by private store detectives. Thus, the Fourth Amendment was inapplicable. (See, People v. Horman, 22 N.Y.2d 378, cert denied 393 U.S. 1057; People v. La Fauci, 91 Misc.2d 980 [Dist Ct, Nassau County 1977].) Moreover, a failure to move to suppress physical evidence does not, in and of itself, establish the ineffective assistance of counsel. (People v Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705; People v. De Mauro, 48 N.Y.2d 892; People v. Hill, 122 A.D.2d 810, 811 [2d Dept 1986].) Finally, the record does not establish that but for counsel's alleged errors, the result would have been different. (See, Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, reh denied 467 U.S. 1267.)

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Smith and Rubin, JJ.