Appeal from judgments of the City Court of Port Jervis, Orange County (Matthew D. Witherow, J.), rendered April 25, 2012. The judgments convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of driving while intoxicated per se and operating a motor vehicle without wearing a safety belt, respectively.

ORDERED that the judgments of conviction are affirmed.

Following a nonjury trial, defendant was convicted of driving while intoxicated per se (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [2]) and operating a motor vehicle without wearing a safety belt (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1229-c [3]). On appeal, defendant contends that the judgments of conviction should be reversed because the City Court erred in denying his motion to suppress all evidence, which had been based on his claim that his vehicle had been unlawfully stopped.

A police officer may lawfully stop a vehicle when he has probable cause to believe that there has been a Vehicle and Traffic Law violation (see People v Robinson, 97 NY2d 341, 348-349 [2001]). Inasmuch as the City Court, as the trier of fact, had the advantage of hearing and seeing the witnesses (see People v Francis, 44 AD3d 788, 789 [2007]), including defendant's expert witness (see Matter of State of New York v Gooding, 104 AD3d 1282 [2013] Matter of State of New York v Kenneth BB., 93 AD3d 900, 902 [2012]), we accord great deference to the court's decision to credit the testimony of the People's witness at the suppression hearing over that of defendant's expert witness. We therefore find that the evidence adduced at the hearing sufficiently demonstrated that the trooper had probable cause to stop defendant's vehicle (see People v Bigelow, 66 NY2d 417, 423 [1985] People v Jacobs, 81 AD3d 977, 978 [2011] People v Francis, 44 AD3d at 789).

Accordingly, the judgments of conviction are affirmed.

Nicolai, P.J., LaSalle and Marano, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: January 31, 2014