Opinion
October 22, 1990
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant and several other individuals were arrested during the execution of a search warrant when the police discovered several vials containing crack-cocaine in a "footlocker" located in the searched premises. After being taken into custody, the defendant was advised of his Miranda rights. He subsequently informed one of the detectives handling the investigation that the drugs removed from his footlocker, after he provided a patrolman with the key, were his and that he did not want to get his friends into trouble.
The defendant, who does not challenge the scope of the search conducted, was by his own admission, a guest in the apartment and he failed to allege facts (see, CPL 710.60) which otherwise demonstrated a legitimate expectation of privacy in the searched premises (see, People v. Rodriguez, 69 N.Y.2d 159; see also, People v. Melendez, 160 A.D.2d 739). The defendant thus lacks standing (see, People v. Ponder, 54 N.Y.2d 160) to challenge the validity of the warrant or to demand a Darden hearing (see, People v. Darden, 34 N.Y.2d 177), and the defendant's use of the premises to store and sell drugs, without more, will not confer upon him the standing he otherwise lacks (People v. Rodriguez, supra; People v. Melendez, supra).
We note that there was ample evidence contained in the record to conclude that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights.
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Lawrence, J.P., Kooper, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.