ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the police officer's hearing testimony was incredible is unpersuasive. It is well settled that the factual findings and credibility determinations of the hearing court are entitled to great deference on appeal and its conclusions will not be set aside unless manifestly erroneous or unsupported by the record (see People v. Curry, 213 A.D.2d 664). Here, there is no basis to disturb the hearing court's determination since the officer's testimony was neither incredible as a matter of law nor patently tailored to overcome constitutional objections (see People v. Curry, supra).
Moreover, the police officer had probable cause to search the contents of the defendant's vehicle (see People v. Guido, 175 A.D.2d 364; People v. Martin, 169 A.D.2d 1006).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
ALTMAN, J.P., SCHMIDT, TOWNES and COZIER, JJ., concur.