Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. There is no basis upon which to disturb the court's credibility determinations, which are supported by the record. Upon observing the livery cab in which defendant was a passenger commit a traffic infraction, the police officers were authorized to stop the car (People v. Ingle, 36 N.Y.2d 413). Since the validity of the stop is based on the objective circumstances and not the subjective intent of the police, it is irrelevant that the officers were motivated by their belief that a robbery was in progress (Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806; People v. Robinson, 271 A.D.2d 17, lv granted 95 N.Y.2d 968; People v. McCoy, 239 A.D.2d 437, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 928).
There was probable cause to arrest defendant. The police officer observed about 50 small plastic bags, which, based on his experience, he knew were used to package illicit drugs, on the rear passenger seat within arm's reach of defendant. In addition, the officer had observed, as he approached the stopped car, movement by defendant suggesting that defendant was trying to distance himself from the bags. The totality of the circumstances, including the number of bags and defendant's furtive behavior, provided the police with probable cause (see, People v. Yancy, 86 N.Y.2d 239; People v. Heretakis, 210 A.D.2d 102 lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 862;People v. Ramos, 168 A.D.2d 359 lv denied; 77 N.Y.2d 910).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.