New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30 (2026)

Motion to suppress evidence; notice to defendant of intention to offer evidence

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 710.30 Motion to suppress evidence; notice to defendant of intention
             to offer evidence.
  1. Whenever the people intend to offer at a trial (a) evidence of a
statement made by a defendant to a public servant, which statement if
involuntarily made would render the evidence thereof suppressible upon
motion pursuant to subdivision three of section 710.20, or (b) testimony
regarding an observation of the defendant either at the time or place of
the commission of the offense or upon some other occasion relevant to
the case, to be given by a witness who has previously identified him or
her or a pictorial, photographic, electronic, filmed or video recorded
reproduction of him or her as such, they must serve upon the defendant a
notice of such intention, specifying the evidence intended to be
offered.
  2. Such notice must be served within fifteen days after arraignment
and before trial, and upon such service the defendant must be accorded
reasonable opportunity to move before trial, pursuant to subdivision one
of section 710.40, to suppress the specified evidence. For good cause
shown, however, the court may permit the people to serve such notice,
thereafter and in such case it must accord the defendant reasonable
opportunity thereafter to make a suppression motion.
  3. In the absence of service of notice upon a defendant as prescribed
in this section, no evidence of a kind specified in subdivision one may
be received against him upon trial unless he has, despite the lack of
such notice, moved to suppress such evidence and such motion has been
denied and the evidence thereby rendered admissible as prescribed in
subdivision two of section 710.70.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 19 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2002–2024 · leading case: The People v. Kaity Marshall, 45 N.E.3d 954 (NY 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

The People v. Kaity Marshall, 45 N.E.3d 954 (NY 2015). “Defendant further argues that we should repudiate a practice that has developed post -Herner into an exception to Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30. Upon consideration of the applicable statutory mandates and case law, as well as the concerns over mistaken identification and the…”

Levantino v. New York State Police, 56 F. Supp. 3d 191 (E.D.N.Y 2014). “Furthermore, as memorialized in the Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30 notice, after being advised of his Miranda rights, the Plaintiff admitted resemblance between him and the suspect in the photograph published in Newsday, in particular that the individual in the photograph…”

People v. Rose, 8 Misc. 3d 184 (2005). “With respect to the second claimed insufficiency, regarding the drug impairment, not only is there no mention in either the simplified traffic information or the supporting deposition of the identity of any drug under which the defendant was purportedly under the influence, but…”

People v. Walters, 46 Misc. 3d 295 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct. 2014). “26 (1), moves for an order, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 2221 (d), granting leave to reargue the January 27, 2014 decision of this court, which denied defendant’s motion seeking, pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30 (3), to preclude at trial the use of any…”

People v. Stanciu, 49 Misc. 3d 430 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct. 2015). “2 and all of the defendant’s answers were incorporated into the prosecution’s notice pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30 (1) (a). During this *433 time no promises or threats were made to the defendant, the defendant was not handcuffed and the Officer’s weapon was in a…”

People v. Parbhu, 191 Misc. 2d 473 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct. 2002). “Motion to Preclude Evidence 4 The motion to preclude evidence of identification for the prosecution’s failure to comply with the provisions of Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30 is denied.”

Matter of D.P., 2007 NY Slip Op 51842(U) (N.Y. Fam. Ct., Nassau Cty. 2007). · cites it 5× “Precluding the Presentment Agency from introducing identification evidence ofRespondent due to the failure of the Presentment Agency to serve notice pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law §710.30; and 5. Granting Respondent discovery pursuant to Family Court Act §331.”

People v. Louis, 2024 NY Slip Op 24266 (N.Y. Sup. Kings 2024). · cites it 4× “The district attorney served notice pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30 of intent to introduce statement and identification evidence ( see Digirolamo aff in opp to mot, dated August 1, 2024, exh 1).”

People v. Lane, 45 Misc. 3d 993 (2014). · cites it 2× “Some weeks prior to trial, defendant’s attorney moved, inter alia, to preclude in-court identifications of defendant by any witness who previously identified defendant at a police-arranged identification procedure because of the People’s failure to serve a notice regarding such…”

People v. Bolden, 1 Misc. 3d 663 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. 2003). · cites it 2× “2 Defendant’s argument presupposes that a meaningful analogy may be drawn between the People’s withdrawal of an appeal and their withdrawal of a notice of intent to introduce evidence served pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30. There are, however, significant differences…”

Matter of S.S., 2007 NY Slip Op 50218(U) (N.Y. Fam. Ct., Nassau Cty. 2007). · cites it 2× “Respondent's counsel objected upon the ground that, at the time the voluntary disclosure forms were served upon him, the Presentment Agency further orally gave him notice pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law §710.30, advising that the petition previously served contained the…”

Matter of C.W.J., 2007 NY Slip Op 51454(U) (N.Y. Fam. Ct., Nassau Cty. 2007). · cites it 2× “Similarly, in the criminal context, Criminal Procedure Law §710.30, provides that: 1.”

Show all 19 citing cases →

— N.Y. Criminal Procedure Law § 710.30(1) — 1 case

Matter of S.S., 2007 NY Slip Op 50218(U) (N.Y. Fam. Ct., Nassau Cty. 2007). “Respondent's counsel objected upon the ground that, at the time the voluntary disclosure forms were served upon him, the Presentment Agency further orally gave him notice pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law §710.30, advising that the petition previously served contained the…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.