Opinion
645 KA 20-00765
10-06-2023
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tyler J. NEAL, Defendant-Appellant.
MARK D. FUNK, CONFLICT DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (CAROLYN WALTHER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (MARTIN P. MCCARTHY, II, OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
MARK D. FUNK, CONFLICT DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (CAROLYN WALTHER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (MARTIN P. MCCARTHY, II, OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., BANNISTER, OGDEN, GREENWOOD, AND NOWAK, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree ( Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25 [2] ). Defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal is invalid and that the police lacked probable cause to arrest him. Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal is invalid and thus does not preclude our review, we conclude that probable cause existed for defendant's arrest. During the suppression hearing, police officers testified, among other things, that defendant and his codefendant were placed, by means of their ankle monitors, at the locations of burglarized homes. The officers also testified that as part of their investigation they obtained surveillance footage that showed defendant in a pawnshop with property matching items that had been stolen (see generally People v. Muhammad , 204 A.D.3d 1402, 1403, 167 N.Y.S.3d 269 [4th Dept. 2022], lv denied 38 N.Y.3d 1073, 171 N.Y.S.3d 430, 191 N.E.3d 382 [2022] ; People v. Young , 152 A.D.3d 981, 982-983, 59 N.Y.S.3d 535 [3d Dept. 2017], lv denied 30 N.Y.3d 955, 67 N.Y.S.3d 138, 89 N.E.3d 528 [2017] ).