The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. Probable cause was established, circumstantially ( see People v Gonzalez, 91 NY2d 909, 910; People v Minis, 88 NY2d 99, 113-114), by testimony that an undercover officer broadcast a specific description and location of two men who had just sold him drugs, and that, immediately thereafter, the testifying officer saw defendant, who matched one of the descriptions, at the specified location in the custody of nontestifying members of the same police field team. "[T]he only rational explanation of how defendant came to be arrested" ( People v Johnson, 281 AD2d 183, lv denied 96 NY2d 903) is that members of the field team heard the radio communication and apprehended defendant on that basis.
Defendant's other argument is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no basis for reversal.