Order unanimously reversed on the law, defendant’s motion to suppress denied and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Onondaga County, for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendants’ motions to suppress evidence seized pursuant to an eavesdropping warrant. The confidential informant was reliable because he personally dealt with defendants’ customers and knew that they purchased cocaine from defendants (see, Draper v United States,
The People established that normal investigative procedures had been tried and failed or that if tried would likely fail (see, CPL 700.20 [2] [d]). The application recited that defendants refused to deal directly with the informant, that the police
