Opinion
January 22, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Linakis, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).
The defendant's challenge to the sufficiency of the affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant application is without merit. The police officer's affidavit alleged that the informant who supplied information to him had supplied accurate information in the past (see, People v. Rodriguez, 52 N.Y.2d 483; People v Hendricks, 25 N.Y.2d 129). Furthermore, the affidavit recited that the informant had personally observed the facts which he or she related to the police and the facts were related in detail (see, People v. Elwell, 50 N.Y.2d 231; People v. Hanlon, 36 N.Y.2d 549). Thus, the affidavit satisfied the two-pronged Aguilar-Spinelli test (see, Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410; Aguilar v Texas, 378 U.S. 108) in that it showed that the informant was reliable and that the informant had an adequate basis for the information he or she transmitted to the police (see, People v Griminger, 71 N.Y.2d 635; People v. Cassella, 143 A.D.2d 192). Because the defendant failed to controvert any of the facts alleged in the warrant application, the court did not err in denying his request for a hearing. Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.