The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. Defendant alleges on appeal that physical evidence and statements should have been suppressed as fruits of an unlawful vehicle stop. However, defendant did not preserve these claims, and the suppression court did not "expressly decide[ ]" (CPL 470.05 [2]) the particular issues raised on appeal (see People v Turriago,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.