Opinion
December 7, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.).
Ordered that the judgment and amended judgment are affirmed.
The defendant was arrested on a weapons charge near the intersection of 96th Street and Clarkson Avenue in Brooklyn, an area known for narcotics-related activity. During a search incident to the arrest, a police officer recovered two packages of cocaine from the defendant's pants pocket. After a hearing on that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress the cocaine, the court determined that there was probable cause to arrest the defendant based on the officer's testimony that he had arrested the defendant after observing the codefendant pass what appeared to be the barrel of a gun to the defendant, who then dropped it upon seeing the officer.
On appeal, the defendant claims that the physical evidence must be suppressed because the hearing court made its determination based on the allegedly patently tailored, incredible testimony of the arresting officer.
However, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the hearing court, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94). The hearing court's determination is accorded great weight on appeal and will not be disturbed unless it is clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759; see also, People v Gaimari, supra). Here, the findings of the hearing court are supported by the record which demonstrates that probable cause existed for the defendant's arrest (see, People v Ward, 175 A.D.2d 819). The hearing court having properly found probable cause to support the defendant's arrest, the search incident to the arrest was lawful (see, People v Brown, 173 A.D.2d 629) and the drugs found on the defendant's person were properly admissible at the trial. Sullivan, J.P., Lawrence, Miller and O'Brien, JJ., concur.