Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We do not agree with the defendant's contention that the arresting officer's testimony at the suppression hearing was patently tailored to nullify constitutional objections or so self-contradictory as to render it unworthy of belief (see, People v. Africk, 107 A.D.2d 700; cf., People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86). Therefore, we refuse to disturb the hearing court's finding of credibility, and its determination that there existed a reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant, which stop then ripened, during the course of events, into probable cause to arrest. Bracken, J.P., Brown, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.