Contrary to the People's argument, defendant's guilty plea did not waive appellate review of the court's final order summarily denying that portion of his motion seeking to suppress items he threw to the ground, namely, a gun, a sock, and envelopes (CPL 710.70). However, the summary denial of that portion of defendant's suppression motion was proper since defendant failed to allege sufficient facts in his motion to establish standing to challenge the admissibility of these discarded items, failed to rebut the People `s abandonment theory, and failed to causally connect his discarding of the gun and other items to the alleged illegal police conduct (see, People v. Arroya, 268 A.D.2d 287; People v. Omaro, 201 A.D.2d 324, 325; see also, People v. Sosa, 246 A.D.2d 387, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 945). At no time did defendant allege that he had actually discarded anything in response to unlawful police conduct. Instead, his allegations were couched in vague and hypothetical language that did not raise a factual issue requiring a hearing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.