Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the police testimony at the suppression hearing had the appearance of being patently tailored to nullify constitutional objections and therefore, should not have been credited. We disagree. It is well settled that the determination of the suppression court, with its advantages of having seen and heard the witnesses, must be accorded great weight and should not be set aside unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Pincus, 184 A.D.2d 666). Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Eiber and Ritter, JJ., concur.