Opinion
January 23, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Covington, J.).
Defendant's motion to suppress physical and identification evidence was properly denied without a hearing, his allegation that the observing officer relayed an inadequate and unreliable radio description of him being factually insufficient to support his claim that the police lacked probable cause to arrest him ( see, People v Mendoza, 82 N.Y.2d 415, 428-429). This deficiency in defendant's suppression motion being apparent on its face, the suppression court's failure to set forth the reasons for its determination requires no remedial action ( see, People v Murray, 172 A.D.2d 437, appeal withdrawn 79 N.Y.2d 942).
Defendant's claim that the court's surrender order was not a part of the plea agreement, and that he therefore should have been allowed to withdraw his plea before being sentenced to a term exceeding the one promised, is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law, since defendant never objected at sentencing nor moved to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction ( see, People v Ramirez, 210 A.D.2d 56, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 1037). Were we to reach the issue, we would find that the surrender order was an express condition of the plea agreement, the court having stated that the order was based on an arrangement it had made with defendant's counsel allowing defendant more bail time to get married.
The sentence properly took into account defendant's breach of the surrender condition of his plea agreement, and was otherwise a proper exercise of discretion ( see, People v Dremeguila, 166 A.D.2d 196, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 1020).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Kupferman, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.