People v. Reddick

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berk-man, J., on motions; Daniel E FitzGerald, J., at plea and sentence), rendered April 12, 2007, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a forged instrument, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2V2 to 5 years, unanimously affirmed. The motion court properly denied, without granting a hearing, defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence. The allegations in defendant’s moving papers, when considered in the context of the detailed information provided to defendant, were insufficient to create a factual dispute requiring a hearing (compare People v Long, 36 AD3d 132 [2006], affd 8 NY3d 1014 [2007], with People v Bryant, 8 NY3d 530, 533-534 [2007]). The discovery information set forth, in detail, a sequence of events leading up to a valid search, pursuant to the automobile exception (see People v Cruz, 7 AD3d 335 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 672 [2004]), of the car in which defendant was riding, and defendant failed to “either controvert the specific information 345 that was provided by the People ... or to provide any other basis for suppression” (People v Arokium, 33 AD3d 458, 459 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 878 [2007]). Concur — Lippman, EJ., Mazzarelli, Buckley, McGuire and DeGrasse, JJ.