Opinion
January 12, 1987
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Goodman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The warrantless search of the defendant's home following his arrest was unlawful, despite the defendant's consent to the initial police entry (see, People v. Knapp, 52 N.Y.2d 689; People v. Cohen, 87 A.D.2d 77, affd 58 N.Y.2d 844). However, the only tangible evidence seized during the search which was admitted into evidence was a number of photographs of the interior of the defendant's house. We note that testimony adduced at the trial encompassed the subject matter of the photographs so that the photographs were cumulative. Also, taking into consideration the victim's dying declarations, the medical examiner's testimony and the circumstantial evidence, the proof of the defendant's guilt was overwhelming. We, therefore, conclude that the erroneous admission of the photographs was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237).
We also conclude that the defendant's statements were not the fruit of the unlawful search inasmuch as there was an independent source for the information the detective possessed while questioning the defendant (see, People v. Arnau, 58 N.Y.2d 27, 32, cert denied 468 U.S. 1217). Furthermore, the defendant's statements were made voluntarily after he was fully advised of his Miranda rights. The defendant's statements were, therefore, admissible.
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law (see, People v. Whalen, 59 N.Y.2d 273, 280; People v. Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818, 819; People v. Arce, 42 N.Y.2d 179, 190), or without merit (see, People v. Nieves, 67 N.Y.2d 125, 133; People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621; People v. Duffy, 36 N.Y.2d 258, 262; People v. Goggins, 34 N.Y.2d 163, 169; People v Westergard, 113 A.D.2d 640, 645, affd 69 N.Y.2d 642). Rubin, J.P., Lawrence, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.