Opinion
March 29, 2000.
Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Marks, J. — Criminal Possession Stolen Property, 4th Degree.
PRESENT: HAYES, J. P., WISNER, HURLBUTT AND KEHOE, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly denied the motion of defendant to suppress physical evidence seized from his person at the time of his arrest. The victim of a menacing incident identified defendant by name and provided the police with a physical description. While following a vehicle closely resembling the vehicle described by the victim, the police ran a computer check that revealed that the vehicle was unregistered and properly stopped the vehicle ( see, People v. Smith, 179 A.D.2d 537, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1008). Defendant, a passenger in the vehicle, was arrested by an officer who had heard the radio broadcast identifying defendant by name and physical description and who was familiar with defendant, having arrested him on a prior occasion. There is no merit to defendant's contention that the police lacked probable cause for the arrest ( see, People v. Motter, 235 A.D.2d 582, 586, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1038; People v. Batista, 197 A.D.2d 456, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 891; People v. Renaudette, 185 A.D.2d 450, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 846) . We perceive no basis to disturb the court's resolution of credibility issues ( see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761). Contrary to defendant's contention, the arresting officer did not provide conflicting testimony whether he knew defendant based on the prior arrest.