The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. The experienced narcotics detective had probable cause to arrest defendant when, in a drug-prone location, he observed defendant receive what appeared to be a tinfoil packet ( see People v. Jones, 90 NY2d 835; People v. McRay, 51 NY2d 594). In any event, these observations at least entitled the detective to make a common-law inquiry, and defendant's patently false responses to the detective's initial questions clearly raised the level of suspicion to probable cause.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.