Opinion
11711 Ind. 5578/13
06-25-2020
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Felix MORALES, Defendant–Appellant.
Christina A. Swarns, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Joseph M. Nursey of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jared Wolkowitz of counsel), for respondent.
Christina A. Swarns, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Joseph M. Nursey of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jared Wolkowitz of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Mazzarelli, Webber, Kern, Moulton, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene D. Goldberg, J. at suppression hearing; Maxwell Wiley, J. at nonjury trial and sentencing), rendered July 7, 2016, of robbery in the second degree (two counts), strangulation in the second degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree (four counts), and sentencing him, as a persistent violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.
The hearing court properly determined that defendant's videotaped statement at the District Attorney's Office was attenuated from earlier statements that the court had suppressed after finding a Miranda violation. The taint of the Miranda violation was dissipated by the brevity of the statement defendant made without Miranda warnings, the passage of time (at least 45 minutes, even if measured only from the departure from the precinct to the beginning of the video statement), the change of location, the administration of a second set of Miranda warnings by a new interrogator, the minimal involvement in the interrogation by the detective who had questioned defendant at the precinct, and the general absence of coercive circumstances (see e.g. People v. White, 10 N.Y.3d 286, 856 N.Y.S.2d 534, 886 N.E.2d 156 [2008], cert denied 555 U.S. 897, 129 S.Ct. 221, 172 L.Ed.2d 167 [2008] ; People v. Davis, 106 A.D.3d 144, 152–155, 963 N.Y.S.2d 48 [1st Dept. 2013], lv denied 21 N.Y.3d 1073, 974 N.Y.S.2d 322, 997 N.E.2d 147 [2013] ; People v. Samuels, 11 A.D.3d 372, 784 N.Y.S.2d 36 [1st Dept. 2004], lv denied 4 N.Y.3d 802, 795 N.Y.S.2d 178, 828 N.E.2d 94 [2005] ).
Any error in precluding counsel from impeaching a detective about allegations made in a lawsuit was harmless, in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, from multiple sources not dependent on this detective's testimony (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787 [1975] ). Moreover, the court, sitting as trier of fact in this nonjury trial, was made aware of the allegations against the detective. As for the other lawsuit discussed by defendant on appeal, trial counsel affirmatively waived any use of that lawsuit for impeachment.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.