Opinion
October 16, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Corriero, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We reject the defendant's contention that the hearing court erred in denying his motion to suppress six .22 caliber rounds of ammunition found on his person subsequent to his arrest. The arresting officer testified that after arriving on the scene in response to a radio call concerning a shooting, and examining the victim, he heard an unidentified individual tell another officer that a person among the group then exiting the building was in possession of a gun. The arresting officer then observed the defendant reach into his front waistband, remove a revolver and toss it away. Contrary to the defendant's assertion, this testimony was not inherently improbable or incredible as a matter of law and we decline to disturb the suppression court's finding that the officer's testimony was credible (cf., People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759; see, People v Africk, 107 A.D.2d 700; People v Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15). Kooper, J.P., Spatt, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.