PEOPLE v. HAMILTON

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court properly determined that the arresting officer had probable cause to believe that the defendant had engaged in an illegal drug transaction (see, People v. Hoover, 236 A.D.2d 626; People v. Graham, 211 A.D.2d 55). A tip from a confidential informant led to the police surveillance of the defendant. The defendant was observed engaging in a sale of drugs. The defendant, who was personally known to both the informant and the officer who conducted the surveillance, was subsequently arrested and found to be in possession of several packets of cocaine.

The court properly exercised its discretion in not conducting an in camera hearing to examine the confidential informant (see, People v. Darden, 34 N.Y.2d 177) since the defendant made no showing to warrant such an examination (see, People v. Adrion, 82 N.Y.2d 628).

The defendant received meaningful representation of counsel (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708).