Opinion
Argued October 25, 2001.
November 19, 2001.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Kowtna, J.), rendered January 6, 1999, convicting him of murder in the second degree and tampering with physical evidence, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Virginia Boccio, North Massapequa, N.Y., for appellant.
Denis Dillon, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Peter A. Weinstein and Denise Pavlides of counsel), for respondent.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., LEO F. McGINITY, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of murder in the second degree based upon depraved indifference to human life beyond a reasonable doubt (see, Penal Law — 125.25[2]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
We reject the defendant's contention that he is entitled to a new trial because the People failed to timely produce Brady material (see, Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83). The purported Brady evidence was not material to the issue of the defendant's guilt (see, Brady v. Maryland, supra; People v. Scott, 88 N.Y.2d 888; People v. Campos, 281 A.D.2d 638). In any event, there is no reasonable probability that the result would have been different had the evidence been disclosed (see, People v. Rodriguez, 281 A.D.2d 644).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
SANTUCCI, J.P., McGINITY, LUCIANO and ADAMS, JJ., concur.