Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he was arrested without probable cause and that, therefore, the tangible evidence should have been suppressed. Defendant failed to move to suppress the evidence and he did not object to its admission at trial. He therefore waived his right to judicial determination of the probable cause issue (see, CPL 710.70) and has failed to preserve it for appellate review (see, People v Coleman, 56 N.Y.2d 269; People v White, 137 A.D.2d 859, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 868).
Moreover, counsel's failure to make a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence cannot be said to have deprived defendant of the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709; People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137; People v White, supra, at 860). Defendant failed to demonstrate "the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations for counsel's failure to request a particular hearing" (People v Rivera, supra, at 709).
We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his pro se brief, and find them to be lacking in merit.