Opinion
(1572) KA 99-05358
December 21, 2001.
(Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Broderick, Sr., J. — Assault, 1st Degree.)
PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., HAYES, WISNER, SCUDDER AND BURNS, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10). We reject the contention of defendant that County Court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements made upon his arrest. The police found defendant hiding in the bushes while they were searching for the person responsible for the assault, and their inquiries concerned the identity of defendant and his reason for hiding. Those inquiries were "designed to clarify the nature of the situation confronted, rather than to coerce a statement" ( People v. Huffman, 41 N.Y.2d 29, 34). Thus, Miranda warnings were not required ( see, People v. Walker, 267 A.D.2d 778, 779-780, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 926; People v. Albano, 124 A.D.2d 739, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 824).
The belated mistrial motion by defendant did not preserve for our review his contention that he was denied a fair trial by a comment made by the prosecutor on summation ( see, People v. Warrick, 261 A.D.2d 152; People v. Valez, 256 A.D.2d 135, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 879). In any event, the court's curative instruction was sufficient to cure any alleged error ( see, People v. Jacquin, 124 A.D.2d 594, 596, affd 71 N.Y.2d 825; People v. Rolchigo, 33 A.D.2d 1060, affd 28 N.Y.2d 644; People v. Moore, 114 A.D.2d 595, 596).
Finally, we reject defendant's contention concerning the severity of the sentence. The court imposed the minimum sentence authorized by statute ( see, Penal Law § 70.06 [a]) and, "[c]onsequently, the sentence cannot be considered unduly harsh or [severe]" ( People v. Ricciardi, 149 A.D.2d 742, 744; see, People v. Jones, 95 A.D.2d 869, 870).