Opinion
April 29, 1999
Appeal from the Family Court, New York County (Mary Bednar, J.).
Appellant's suppression motion was properly denied. The search in question was based on information supplied by a registered, reliable confidential informant. The court's denial of appellant's request for a Darden hearing ( People v. Darden, 34 N.Y.2d 177) to determine whether the informant in fact existed was an appropriate exercise of the court's discretion ( see, People v. Adrion, 82 N.Y.2d 628, 636; People v. Fulton; 58 N.Y.2d 914). Appellant did not make a showing sufficient to raise a question as to the informant's existence and the hearing court was able to satisfy itself as to the informant's existence as a result of the detailed testimony of the warrant application affiant ( see, People v. Ferron, 248 A.D.2d 962, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 879; People v. Christian, 248 A.D.2d 960, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 1006). We further find that appellant received meaningful representation by counsel at the suppression hearing ( see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 713-714).
Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Lerner, Mazzarelli and Friedman, JJ.