Opinion
570417/02.
Decided July 22, 2004.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Bronx County, rendered May 10, 2001 (Diane Kiesel, J.) convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 265.01), criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 165.40) and falsely reporting an incident in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.55), and imposing sentence.
Judgment of conviction rendered May 10, 2001 (Diane Kiesel, J.) affirmed.
PRESENT: HON. WILLIAM P. McCOOE, J.P., HON. WILLIAM J. DAVIS, HON. PHYLLIS GANGEL-JACOB, Justices.
Although the hearing court determined that the initial police detention of defendant was unlawful, it properly denied suppression of defendant's statements alleged to be the fruit of the illegality, since the taint was sufficiently attenuated ( see People v. Pleasant, 54 NY2d 972, cert denied 455 US 924) by the police discovery of the existence of a bench warrant for defendant's arrest on unrelated charges ( see Kamins, New York Search Seizure [2004], at 24). "Only defendant's identity was obtained as a result of the unlawful seizure" ( People v. Pleasant, 54 NY2d at 974), information which the prosecution demonstrated would inevitably have been revealed ( see People v. Turriago, 90 NY2d 77, 86). The record also supports the court's finding that defendant's statements were spontaneous and voluntary, and were not the product of custodial interrogation ( see People v. Blunt, 273 AD2d 146, lv denied 95 NY2d 850).
Defendant's present challenge to the plea allocution is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v. Vasquez, 267 AD2d 118, lv denied 95 NY2d 805) and, in any event, is lacking in substantial merit. Although the plea allocution established only that defendant falsely reported a "crime" or "emergency" (Penal Law § 240.50), as opposed to an "explosion" (Penal Law § 240.55), the reduction in charges now sought by defendant is unwarranted since the bargained guilty plea "makes unnecessary a factual basis for the particular crime confessed" ( People v. Claiborne, 29 NY2d 950, 951; see also People v. Keizer, 100 NY2d 114).
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.