From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Curtis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 7, 1995
218 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

August 7, 1995

Appeal from the County Court, Dutchess County (Marlow, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the hearing court erred in failing to suppress his audiotaped statement to the police. Considering the strength of the evidence against the defendant, including the testimony of three eyewitnesses to the crime, and that the defendant's testimony was more inculpatory than his audiotaped statement, any error in admitting the statement at trial was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237; People v. Carter, 197 A.D.2d 530, 531).

In view of the violent nature of the offense and the defendant's lack of remorse, we cannot say that the sentencing court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant youthful offender status (see, People v. Vera, 206 A.D.2d 494; People v. Poe, 158 A.D.2d 558, 559). Thompson, J.P., Ritter, Copertino and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Curtis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 7, 1995
218 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Curtis

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEANE CURTIS, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Aug 7, 1995

Citations

218 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
630 N.Y.S.2d 357

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

However, the admission of the defendant's statement at trial was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, as it…

People v. Alzandani

In this case, it is not evident from the matter appearing on the record that the defendant was deprived of…