The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. Defendant argues that the police lacked the necessary predicate for requesting permission to search the car in which he was riding. At the suppression hearing, defendant raised other issues relating to the driver's consent. However, he never alerted the court to the particular issue raised on appeal, and the court did not "expressly decide[ ]" (CPL 470.05 [2]) that issue (see People v Turriago,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
PEOPLE v. CALDERON
6822, 4911/09.
92 A.D.3d 606 (2012)
938 N.Y.S.2d 561
2012 NY Slip Op 1496
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARTIN CALDERON, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided February 28, 2012.
Decided February 28, 2012.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
