34 NY3d 1022

2019

People v McCullum

Court of Appeals

December 17, 2019

34 NY3d 1022 | 2019 NY Slip Op 08977

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, January 22, 2020

Argued November 19, 2019; decided December 17, 2019

People v McCullum, 159 AD3d 8, affirmed.

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Paul Skip Laisure, Appellate Advocates, New York City (Benjamin S. Litman of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Solomon Neubort and Leonard Joblove of counsel), for respondent.

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, New York City (Elizabeth Riordan Hurley, Gregory Diskant and Joshua Kipnees of counsel), for The Community Development Project of the Urban Justice Center and others, amici curiae.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. As defendant concedes, he failed to preserve the only argument that he now raises on appeal—namely, his standing to challenge the police search of his property on the ground that he retained a reasonable expectation of privacy as a bailor following the New York City Marshal‘s legal possession of the apartment where he resided. On the facts of this case, we reject defendant‘s contention that an exception to the preservation rule applies. Accordingly, no question of law is presented for our review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Wallace, 27 NY3d 1037, 1038 [2016]).

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia, Wilson and Feinman concur.

Order affirmed, in a memorandum.