NY2: “Defense counsel’s equivocal, vague and conclusory statements that defendant had standing to challenge the searches” has no offer of proof or facts

“The court correctly denied, on the ground of lack of standing as well as on the merits, defendant’s motion to controvert two search warrants. Defense counsel’s equivocal, vague and conclusory statements that defendant had standing to challenge the searches of two separate locations based upon information and belief that defendant resided in both of those premises failed to allege facts sufficient to demonstrate a reasonable expectation of privacy in either place ….” There was also probable cause. People v. Wilson, 2019 NY Slip Op 03452, 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3457 (1st Dept. May 2, 2019).

“Regardless of whether defendant made a valid waiver of the right to appeal, we find, based on our in camera review of the sealed search warrant documents, that there was probable cause for the issuance of both warrants.” People v. Pena, 2019 NY Slip Op 03448, 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3441 (1st Dept. May 2, 2019).*

This was not a warrantless search because the search warrant had been issued just prior to the entry. And there was probable cause for the warrant. People v. Oliver, 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3423 (3d Dept. May 2, 2019) (conviction date Dec. 1, 2014: 53 months to decide this appeal in a memorandum).*