MEMORANDUM.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Police officers, who as in the present case have received a report that a person answering defendant's description was seen waving a gun on the street, and who thereafter conduct a valid stop and frisk, are not limited to a patdown of the suspect's person and may examine personal items capable of concealing a weapon within the suspect's grabbable reach "as an incident to an inquiry upon grounds of safety and precaution" ( People v Pugach, 15 N.Y.2d 65, 69; see, People v Davis, 64 N.Y.2d 1143; People v Moore, 32 N.Y.2d 67, cert denied 414 U.S. 1011; People v Tratch, 104 A.D.2d 503). The factual findings made at the Appellate Division, which have support in the record and thus may not be disturbed by this court ( People v Harrison, 57 N.Y.2d 470), establish that grounds for a stop and frisk existed ( e.g., People v McLaurin, 43 N.Y.2d 902) and that the parameters of a permissible frisk were not exceeded ( People v Pugach, supra; People v Tratch, supra; United States v Sims, 450 F.2d 261, 263; Commonwealth v Anderson, 366 Mass. 394, 318 N.E.2d 834). People v Tucker ( 44 N.Y.2d 941, revg on dissent at 58 A.D.2d 673, 674) involved "a full-blown search * * * [conducted] on the pretext of a stop and frisk" and is, therefore, distinguishable on its facts.
Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges JASEN, MEYER, SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER and TITONE concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.