Opinion
October 23, 1995
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (West, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The Supreme Court properly concluded that the search warrant issued for the defendant's apartment was supported by probable cause. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the reliability of the confidential informant upon whose information the search warrant was granted was sufficiently demonstrated in the warrant application. The informant had previously provided reliable narcotics information to the police on several occasions, leading to arrests, and at the behest of the investigating officers and under their supervision, he conducted three purchases of narcotics from the defendant in this case (see, Aguilar v Texas, 378 U.S. 108; Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410; People v. Glenn, 207 A.D.2d 909).
In addition, where, as here, the contraband sought was capable of being easily and quickly destroyed, there was a sufficient basis to permit the warrant to be executed after 9:00 P.M. (see, e.g., People v. Rose, 31 N.Y.2d 1036; People v. Wollenberg, 123 A.D.2d 413; People v. Harrison, 122 A.D.2d 223; see also, People v Garzia, 56 A.D.2d 635, affd 44 N.Y.2d 867, cert denied 439 U.S. 930).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Altman, J.P., Hart, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.