Opinion
April 9, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.).
Although preserved for review, we hold, contrary to defendant's contention, that the IAS court properly reviewed the People's ex parte motion for a protective order to deny disclosure of the affidavit supporting the search warrant, having made an in camera examination of the search warrant application and motion, filed a written decision explaining its decision, and ordered a Darden hearing (People v Darden, 34 N.Y.2d 177). It was not necessary that the confidential informant be present at the Darden hearing, since he had already been produced before the warrant-issuing Magistrate who was able to establish his existence and reliability (People v Carpenito, 171 A.D.2d 45, 50, lv granted 78 N.Y.2d 1126). We have considered defendant's other claims and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Ross and Rubin, JJ.