Opinion
November 16, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Kubiniec, J.
Present — Denman, J.P., Green, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant lacks standing to challenge the propriety of the search of the automobile operated by Samuel Amoia because defendant had no legitimate expectation of privacy in either the automobile or its contents (see, People v. Reynolds, 71 N.Y.2d 552, 557; People v. Rodriguez, 69 N.Y.2d 159, 163).
In any event, probable cause for the issuance of the several eavesdropping warrants and for the interception of oral communications within identified premises was established before the issuing court, and the police made a sufficient showing that normal investigative procedures had been tried and failed and that other normal investigative procedures appeared unlikely to succeed if used (CPL 700.15; People v. Campaigni, 151 A.D.2d 1010, lv. denied 74 N.Y.2d 845).
Defendants' claim that the court erred by declining to hold a Darden hearing (see, People v. Darden, 34 N.Y.2d 177, affg 40 A.D.2d 588) has not been preserved for our review (see, CPL 470.05).