¶1OPINION OF THE COURT
¶2Memorandum.
¶3The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
¶4It is unnecessary to consider whether it was proper for the police to have overheard the conversation at the defendant’s door, in view of the fact that the other information available to the police prior to their entry of the defendant’s apartment was alone sufficient to sustain the finding of probable cause (see, People v Plevy, 52 NY2d 58, 66).
¶5Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander concur.
¶6Order affirmed in a memorandum.