N.Y. CPL Law § 710.20

§ 710.20 Motion to suppress evidence; in general; grounds for.\n Upon motion of a defendant who (a) is aggrieved by unlawful or\nimproper acquisition of evidence and has reasonable cause to believe\nthat such may be offered against him in a criminal action, or (b) claims\nthat improper identification testimony may be offered against him in a\ncriminal action, a court may, under circumstances prescribed in this\narticle, order that such evidence be suppressed or excluded upon the\nground that it:\n 1. Consists of tangible property obtained by means of an unlawful\nsearch and seizure under circumstances precluding admissibility thereof\nin a criminal action against such defendant; or\n 2. Consists of a record or potential testimony reciting or describing\ndeclarations, conversations, or other communications overheard,\nintercepted, accessed, or recorded by means of eavesdropping, or\nobservations made by means of video surveillance, obtained under\ncircumstances precluding admissibility thereof in a criminal action\nagainst such defendant; or\n 3. Consists of a record or potential testimony reciting or describing\na statement of such defendant involuntarily made, within the meaning of\nsection 60.45; or\n 4. Was obtained as a result of other evidence obtained in a manner\ndescribed in subdivisions one, two and three; or\n 5. Consists of a chemical test of the defendant's blood administered\nin violation of the provisions of subdivision three of section eleven\nhundred ninety-four of the vehicle and traffic law, subdivision eight of\nsection forty-nine-a of the navigation law, subdivision seven of section\n25.24 of the parks, recreation and historic preservation law, or any\nother applicable law; or\n 6. Consists of potential testimony regarding an observation of the\ndefendant either at the time or place of the commission of the offense\nor upon some other occasion relevant to the case, which potential\ntestimony would not be admissible upon the prospective trial of such\ncharge owing to an improperly made previous identification of the\ndefendant or of a pictorial, photographic, electronic, filmed or video\nrecorded reproduction of the defendant by the prospective witness. A\nclaim that the previous identification of the defendant or of a\npictorial, photographic, electronic, filmed or video recorded\nreproduction of the defendant by a prospective witness did not comply\nwith paragraph (c) of subdivision one of section 60.25 of this chapter\nor with the protocol promulgated in accordance with subdivision\ntwenty-one of section eight hundred thirty-seven of the executive law\nshall not constitute a legal basis to suppress evidence pursuant to this\nsubdivision. A claim that a public servant failed to comply with\nparagraph (c) of subdivision one of section 60.25 of this chapter or of\nsubdivision twenty-one of section eight hundred thirty-seven of the\nexecutive law shall neither expand nor limit the rights an accused\nperson may derive under the constitution of this state or of the United\nStates.\n 7. Consists of information obtained by means of a pen register or trap\nand trace device installed or used in violation of the provisions of\narticle seven hundred five of this chapter.\n