PEOPLE v. MCCULLUM (2019)

Court of Appeals of New York.

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ramee MCCULLUM, Appellant.

No. 101

Decided: December 17, 2019

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 N.Y.3d 1037, 1038, 33 N.Y.S.3d 828, 53 N.E.3d 705 [2016]).

Order affirmed, in a memorandum.

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

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network