Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. WILLIAMS

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Nov 25, 1996
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied suppression of physical and identification evidence obtained as a result of the warrantless entry by the police into the apartment to which the defendant fled. Here, the defendant failed to establish a reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to the premises searched and, thus, lacked standing to challenge the warrantless entry and subsequent search and seizure ( see, People v Wesley, 73 NY2d 351; People v Rodriguez, 69 NY2d 159; People v Mills, 159 AD2d 520; cf., People v Garrett, 177 AD2d 705). In any event, the police entry into the subject apartment was proper under both the consent ( see, People v Gonzalez, 39 NY2d 122) and exigent circumstances exceptions to warrantless searches and seizures ( see, People v Adrion, 82 NY2d 628; People v Elwell, 50 NY2d 231; People v Calhoun, 49 NY2d 398; People v Green, 103 AD2d 362).

The defendant waived his speedy trial claim due to his failure to provide the People with reasonable notice of his CPL 30.30 motion to dismiss the indictment ( see, People v Lawrence, 64 NY2d 200; People v Bernhardt, 223 AD2d 595; People v Harvall, 196 AD2d 553; People v Littles, 188 AD2d 255).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.