People v. KitchenPeople v. Kitchen
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting defendant after a jury trial of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16 [1]), defendant contends that County Court erred in denying his motion to suppress the cocaine seized because his initial arrest for harassment was concededly illegal under CPL 140.10 (1) (a). We disagree. The seizure of the cocaine from the attic of the home where defendant was initially arrested was attenuated from that initial illegal arrest for harassment and was based on probable cause independently developed (see, People v Rogers,
We reject the contention of defendant that the court erred in denying his CPL 30.30 speedy trial motion (see, People v Goss,
We further reject the contentions of defendant that the attorney who represented him when he entered his guilty pleas in connection with indictment Nos. 94-641-1 and 94-836-1 had a conflict of interest and that the court erred in refusing to