Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Darryle Buckner, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1998-10-02
Citations: 254 A.D.2d 692
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Darryle Buckner, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 254
Pages: 692–692

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Darryle Buckner, Respondent.
[678 NYS2d 552]

Opinion:
Order unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated in the decision at Erie County Court (McCarthy, J.). We add only that the People's contention that the location of defendant "is unknown and he is attempting to avoid apprehension" (CPL 30.30 [4] [former (c)]), a circumstance that would not require a showing of due diligence, is unpreserved for our review. That contention was not raised in the People's response to defendant's CPL 30.30 motion to dismiss or at the due diligence hearing (see, People v Bolden, 81 NY2d 146, 155-156), and we decline to address it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice {see, CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). (Appeal from Order of Erie County Court, McCarthy, J. — Dismiss Indictment.) Present— Denman, P. J., Pine, Wisner, Balio and Fallon, JJ.