IN RE: PIERRE H. (1999)

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Mary Bednar, J.), entered on or about February 21, 1997, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon his admission that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and placed him with the New York State Division for Youth for 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

 Appellant's suppression motion was properly denied.   The search in question was based on information supplied by a registered, reliable confidential informant.   The court's denial of appellant's request for a Darden hearing (People v. Darden, 34 N.Y.2d 177, 356 N.Y.S.2d 582, 313 N.E.2d 49) to determine whether the informant in fact existed was an appropriate exercise of the court's discretion (see, People v. Adrion, 82 N.Y.2d 628, 636, 606 N.Y.S.2d 893, 627 N.E.2d 973;  People v. Fulton, 58 N.Y.2d 914, 460 N.Y.S.2d 508, 447 N.E.2d 56).   Appellant did not make a showing sufficient to raise a question as to the informant's existence and the hearing court was able to satisfy itself as to the informant's existence as a result of the detailed testimony of the warrant application affiant (see, People v. Ferron, 248 A.D.2d 962, 670 N.Y.S.2d 955, lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 879, 678 N.Y.S.2d 26, 700 N.E.2d 564;  People v. Christian, 248 A.D.2d 960, 670 N.Y.S.2d 957, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 1006, 676 N.Y.S.2d 134, 698 N.E.2d 963).   We further find that appellant received meaningful representation by counsel at the suppression hearing (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 713-714, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.