People v. France

Because defendant’s averments in support of his motion to suppress physical evidence are sufficient to warrant a hearing, I would *268hold the appeal in abeyance and remit the matter for such hearing.

It is now well settled that, in determining the sufficiency of a defendant’s factual allegations, a court must read the defendant’s suppression motion in the context of the case and “[wjhether a defendant has raised factual issues requiring a hearing can only be determined with reference to the People’s contentions.” (People v Bryant, 8 NY3d 530, 533 [2007], quoting People v Mendoza, 82 NY2d 415, 427…