Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing court properly found that the police had probable cause to arrest him. The hearing testimony reveals that on the evening of January 29, 1991, Detective Anthony Romano was participating in a so-called "buy and bust" operation in a known narcotics area, when he observed the defendant hand a sum of United States currency to a codefendant in exchange for a number of small white paper packets. Based upon his observations, the detective, an experienced narcotics officer who had received intensive training in narcotics packaging and identification, believed that the white paper packets exchanged in the transaction contained "bazooka cocaine". Detective Romano then arrested the defendant, and recovered eight packets of cocaine from his jacket pocket. We are satisfied, that under the totality of the circumstances of this case, there was sufficient information to lead a reasonable person who possessed the same expertise as the officer to conclude that a crime was being committed. Therefore, the officer had probable cause to arrest the defendant (see, People v McRay, 51 N.Y.2d 594, 604; People v. Mariner, 147 A.D.2d 659; People v. Zarzuela, 141 A.D.2d 788; People v. Luccioni, 120 A.D.2d 617).
Furthermore, while the defendant correctly notes that the hearing court applied an incorrect standard of review, since a full and fair hearing on the defendant's suppression motion was conducted which provides an adequate record for review, it is unnecessary to remit the matter for a new hearing (see, People v White, 117 A.D.2d 127; People v. Acosta, 74 A.D.2d 640). Sullivan, J.P., Lawrence, Eiber and Ritter, JJ., concur.