The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress drugs recovered from his person. An experienced narcotics officer saw defendant engage in what reasonably appeared to be a drug transaction, and then drive away. Acting upon a description of defendant and his vehicle transmitted by radio, a field team stopped defendant's vehicle and apprehended him. The radio communication from the observing officer was, itself, a sufficient basis for a lawful arrest ( see People v Ketcham, 93 NY2d 416; People v Brown, 304 AD2d 321, lv denied 100 NY2d 536). In addition, one of the apprehending officers detected the distinctive odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle ( see People v Reisman, 29 NY2d 278, 284, cert denied 405 US 1041), and this independently established probable cause to search the automobile and its occupants ( see People v Chestnut, 43 AD2d 260, affd 36 NY2d 971). The hearing court properly credited an officer's testimony that he recognized the smell of marijuana.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.