PEOPLE v. BLUNT

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record supports the Supreme Court's finding that a valid predicate existed for the police to stop the defendant and ask for his identification (CPL 140.50; People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210, 223). Once the defendant voluntarily identified himself as Herman Blunt, the police had probable cause to arrest him, since Blunt had been previously identified by a named citizen as having committed a burglary (see, People v. Inman, 80 A.D.2d 622). Kunzeman, J.P., Harwood, Balletta and O'Brien, JJ., concur.