Although the People seek to justify the search at issue under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, the only evidence that such a search actually occurred was expressly discredited by the hearing court.
"The hearing court plainly had doubts about the credibility of the police witness[], and we will not substitute our own findings on credibility unless the fact findings under review are plainly unjustified or clearly erroneous" ( People v Corbin, 201 AD2d 359 [internal quotation marks omitted]). "[M]uch weight must be accorded the determination of the suppression court with its peculiar advantages of having seen and heard the witnesses" ( People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761).
While a defendant who challenges a search and seizure has the ultimate burden of proving illegality, the People have the burden of going forward to show the legality of the police conduct in the first instance ( People v Berrios, 28 NY2d 361, 367), and that burden cannot be met by testimony that the hearing court finds incredible ( id. at 369). Accordingly, the People failed to satisfy their initial burden.
We have considered and rejected the People's remaining arguments.