Opinion
May 19, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gallagher, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
On the record before us, we do not find the arresting officer's testimony to have been either incredible as a matter of law or patently tailored to avoid constitutional objections (see, People v Berrios, 28 N.Y.2d 361; People v Hardy, 106 A.D.2d 403). Accordingly, the People met their burden of coming forward with sufficient evidence to establish that the search in question was constitutional. Brown, J.P., Weinstein, Niehoff and Spatt, JJ., concur.