Opinion
October 18, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that, at the suppression hearing, the People failed to establish probable cause for his arrest because they did not proffer the testimony of the officer who observed the defendant engage in several narcotics transactions, is without merit. "When an arresting officer has acted on the basis of a radio bulletin from a fellow officer who has personal knowledge of the facts transmitted, the reliability of the information conveyed may be presumed, and the People are not required to call the undercover officer to testify at the suppression hearing in order to discharge their burden of coming forward with evidence to establish probable cause (see, People v Petralia, 62 N.Y.2d 47, 51, cert denied 469 U.S. 852; People v Acevedo, 179 A.D.2d 465; People v. Arango, 175 A.D.2d 840)" (People v. Brown, 184 A.D.2d 647, 647-648). Moreover, the observations of the officer, as testified to by the arresting officer, were sufficient to establish probable cause for the defendant's arrest (see, People v. Jones, 186 A.D.2d 681).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contention and find that it is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.