Court of Appeals of New York

Defendant's motion to suppress evidence of child pornography that was originally obtained pursuant to a warrant but was not forensically examined until after his first conviction for child pornography, was properly denied, where: 1) in the aftermath of the execution of the valid May 4, 2009 warrant, defendant was deprived of any legitimate expectation of privacy he may have had respecting the seized items; and 2) the continued validity of a search warrant and any assumption of custody it authorizes is not necessarily tied to the pendency of any particular prosecution.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/26/2013
• Published 03/26/2013

Judges

• LIPPMAN

Court

• Court of Appeals of New York

Counsel