Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
"`The credibility determinations of a hearing court are entitled to great deference on appeal, and will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record'" ( People v Moran, 68 AD3d 786, 787, quoting People v Martinez, 58 AD3d 870, 870-871). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the testimony of the police detective at the suppression hearing was not incredible, patently tailored to nullify constitutional objections, or otherwise unworthy of belief ( see People v Cooks, 57 AD3d 796, 797; People v Cherry, 46 AD3d 834; People v Hay, 37 AD3d 494; People v Rivera, 27 AD3d 489, 490).
Furthermore, the hearing court's determination that the police possessed probable cause to arrest the defendant was adequately supported by the record ( see People v Soto, 63 AD3d 512, 512-513; People v Scott-Heron, 11 AD3d 364; People v Brown, 193 AD2d 612, 613; People v Guine, 173 AD2d 849). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.