Opinion
12015 Ind. No. 1225/16 Case No.2018–3075
10-08-2020
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Shaun WATSON, Defendant–Appellant.
Janet E. Sabel, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Richard Joselson of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Alan Gadlin of counsel), for respondent.
Janet E. Sabel, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Richard Joselson of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Alan Gadlin of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., González, Kennedy, Mendez, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (James M. Burke, J. at motion to controvert search warrant; Robert M. Mandelbaum, J. at plea; Ellen N. Biben, J. at sentencing), rendered June 28, 2017, convicting defendant of attempted robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of four years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant forfeited review of the denial of his motion to controvert a search warrant, by pleading guilty before the court issued an order finally denying his suppression motion (see CPL 710.70[2] ; People v. Fernandez, 67 N.Y.2d 686, 688, 499 N.Y.S.2d 919, 490 N.E.2d 838 [1986] ). "Even if the court's order can be viewed as deciding the particular issue defendant seeks to raise on appeal," the order was not a final denial of suppression "because it was contingent on the outcome of a hearing" ( People v. Wilson, 167 A.D.3d 478, 478–479, 89 N.Y.S.3d 175 [1st Dept. 2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 955, 100 N.Y.S.3d 200, 123 N.E.3d 859 [2019] ). An important issue relating to the validity of the warrant was whether certain information supporting the warrant was lawfully obtained. That issue would have depended on the outcome of an evidentiary hearing that was ordered, but not held because defendant chose to plead guilty.
In any event, we find that the search warrant was supported by probable cause.