Opinion
June 8, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The evidence adduced at the pretrial suppression hearing established that on November 19, 1987, at approximately 2:00 A.M., two police officers, while on routine patrol, noticed a disturbance in front of a building located in Brooklyn. As they entered the lobby of the building with the intention of telling the individuals inside to quiet down, the door of an apartment on their left opened up and an unidentified male was pushed out of the doorway by the defendant. The defendant was standing in the open doorway holding what appeared to the officers to be a gun. From their vantage point in the lobby, the officers were also able to observe what appeared to them to be vials of crack cocaine on top of a table two to three feet inside the apartment. The defendant was then arrested inside the apartment. The police recovered 84 vials of crack cocaine, approximately 100 additional empty vials, and United States currency. The defendant contends that the court improperly credited the testimony of the police officers and should have granted suppression of the physical evidence recovered in the apartment. We disagree.
Although there are minor inconsistencies in the testimony of the police officers, the hearing court's resolution of issues of credibility is entitled to great weight on appeal and will not be disturbed here since it is supported by the record (see, People v. Prochillo, 41 N.Y.2d 759; People v. Smith, 182 A.D.2d 786). The evidence, which was properly credited by the court, was sufficient to establish that the police had probable cause to arrest the defendant and to seize the contraband without first securing a search warrant (see, People v. Clements, 37 N.Y.2d 675, cert denied sub nom. Metzger v. New York, 425 U.S. 911). Accordingly, suppression was properly denied. Harwood, J.P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.