People v. WalkerPeople v. Walker
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the testimony at the suppression hearing was not patently incredible or unworthy of belief (see People v Rivera, 27 AD3d 489, 490 [2006]). The hearing court properly found that the police had probable cause for the defendant’s arrest (see People v Jones, 90 NY2d 835 [1997]; People v McRay, 51 NY2d 594, 601-602 [1980]; People v Carter, 198 AD2d 229 [1993]; People v Jones, 186 AD2d 681 [1992]). Accordingly, the hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence recovered pursuant to a lawful search of the defendant (see People v Hall, 10 NY3d 303, 310 [2008], cert denied 555 US 938 [2008]; People v Clayton, 57 AD3d 557 [2008]; People v Butler, 27 AD3d 365 [2006]).
The trial court properly allowed the People to question the defendant about prior drug arrests after the defendant opened the door to that line of inquiry (see People v Fardan, 82 NY2d 638, 646 [1993]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see