NY4: Did def’s PC argument suggest a lack of standing?

Defendant’s framing of his probable cause issue here would seem to lead to his lack of standing. Here, his claim was the lack of probable cause for the search of the phone because it wasn’t his. But, isn’t that a waiver of a reasonable expectation of privacy and an admission of a lack of standing? If so, then the admission of the phone evidence is a relevance question at trial. The court did not decide it this way; this is my observation. People v. Rath, 2021 NY Slip Op 01667, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1769 (4th Dept. Mar. 19, 2021):

Defendant contends that the court erred in refusing to suppress the cell phone recovered from his person at the time of his arrest because the search warrant application was not supported by probable cause inasmuch as it did not allege that the cell phone actually belonged to him. That contention is not preserved for our review …, and we conclude that it is without merit in any event. Search warrant applications are not to be read “hypertechnically and may be ‘accorded all reasonable inferences'” …. We conclude that it was reasonable to infer that the cell phone in the possession of the police belonged to defendant based on the allegations in the search warrant application.”

See § 60.19 on what is the point of the motion to suppress.