OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant argues on this appeal that the police acted unreasonably in conducting a pat-down search based on a tip supplied by an informant during a face-to-face encounter with police that defendant had a gun and said that he intended to "rip off a 'queen’ ”.

Resolution of this question turns primarily on an assessment of the credibility of the officer who testified before the suppression court. Thus, in view of the undisturbed finding that the police possessed reasonable suspicion to frisk defendant, his contention presents a mixed question of law and fact, which we will review only to the extent of determining whether there was evidence at the suppression hearing to support the hearing court’s determination (People v Van Lucen, 64 NY2d 625; People c Vincente, 63 NY2d 745). Because such record support exists, we conclude that the motion to suppress was properly denied.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.