PEOPLE v. CARTER

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

Defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel based upon the failure of defense counsel to request a hearing to determine whether his statement to the police should have been suppressed as the product of an illegal arrest. Defendant has failed to show that a motion to suppress on that ground, "if made, would have been successful and that counsel otherwise failed to provide meaningful representation" ( People v. Willis, 261 A.D.2d 946, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 1029). The police were dispatched at 2:30 A.M. to investigate an alarm at a clothing store, where they observed defendant exit through a door that had obviously been pried open. The police properly asked defendant his name ( see generally, People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210, 223), and defendant made a statement in response to that inquiry. Supreme Court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress the statement as involuntarily made ( see, People v. Wiesmore, 204 A.D.2d 1003, 1003-1004, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 873), and defendant has failed to show that the court would have suppressed his statement if defense counsel had sought a probable cause hearing. Upon our review of the record, we conclude that defendant was provided meaningful representation ( see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712-713).