Opinion
October 26, 1992
Appeal from the Family Court, Queens County (Ambrosio, J.).
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The appellant contends that the Family Court erred in crediting the hearing testimony of a police officer regarding his observation of a bulge in the appellant's waistband. However, as we frequently have noted, "[t]he determination of the hearing court, with its advantage of having seen and heard the witnesses, must be accorded great weight (see, People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761). Issues of credibility are primarily for the hearing court, and its findings should be upheld unless they are clearly erroneous (see, People v Armstead, 98 A.D.2d 726; People v Africk, 107 A.D.2d 700, 701-702)" (People v Davis, 166 A.D.2d 604, 605). In the instant case, the testifying officer claimed that he saw a bulge in the appellant's waistband when the appellant pushed open a door in order to exit a restaurant. Although the appellant adduced evidence indicating that the restaurant door could only be pulled open from the inside, we find that this discrepancy did not render the officer's logical and consistent testimony manifestly untrue or unbelievable. Hence, we discern no basis for disturbing the determination of the Family Court as to the credibility of the officer.
Furthermore, the observation of the bulge, which is recognized as the "telltale of a weapon" (People v De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210, 221; see, People v Rasberry, 172 A.D.2d 293; People v King, 165 A.D.2d 835; People v Sims, 127 A.D.2d 712), along with the other circumstances in this case, justified the officer's actions of stopping the appellant and conducting the protective pat-down frisk which precipitated the arrest. Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Balletta and Copertino, JJ., concur.