Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's sole contention raised on appeal, we find no basis to disturb the Supreme Court's determination that the defendant was not entitled to a Mapp/Dunaway hearing. The allegations in the affirmation of his defense counsel were insufficient to raise an issue concerning the defendant's standing to challenge the search and seizure of the controlled substances and the handgun found in the codefendant's apartment (see, CPL 710.20; 710.60 [1], [3]; People v. Gomez, 67 N.Y.2d 843). Further, defense counsel "completely failed to set forth factual allegations with respect to [the defendant's] or the police officers' conduct" which would warrant a hearing (see, People v. Covington, 144 A.D.2d 238). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.