From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Colon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 15, 2004
5 A.D.3d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

1999-10573, 1999-10574.

Decided March 15, 2004.

Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Pano Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered June 24, 1999, convicting him of murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree (three counts), robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 98-476, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2) a judgment of the same court also rendered June 24, 1999, convicting him of attempted assault in the second degree under Indictment No. 99-043, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal from the first judgment brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials.

John P. Savoca, White Plains, N.Y., for appellant.

Francis D. Phillips II, Goshen, N.Y. (Daniel M. Reback of counsel), for respondent.

Before: SONDRA MILLER, J.P., DANIEL F. LUCIANO, THOMAS A. ADAMS, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing court properly denied that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress his written confession and inculpatory statements to law enforcement officials with respect to a stabbing death and robbery in which he was a suspect, as the hearing testimony established that the confession and statements were voluntarily given after he was properly informed of his Miranda rights ( see Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436) and agreed to waive them ( see Miranda v. Arizona, supra; People v. Huntley, 15 N.Y.2d 72; People v. Anderson, 260 A.D.2d 386, 387).

Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses ( see People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record ( see People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt with respect to the charges of murder in the first and second degree, robbery in the first and second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree was not against the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15).

The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80; see also People v. Hall, 302 A.D.2d 406).

With respect to the defendant's conviction of attempted assault in the second degree, we have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant's assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel in connection with that appeal is granted ( see Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738; People v. Paige, 54 A.D.2d 631; cf. People v. Gonzalez, 47 N.Y.2d 606).

S. MILLER, J.P., LUCIANO, ADAMS and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Colon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 15, 2004
5 A.D.3d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

People v. Colon

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. LUIS COLON, appellant

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

Date published: Mar 15, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
774 N.Y.S.2d 716

Citing Cases

People v. Colon

June 14, 2004. Appeal from the 2d Dept: 5 AD3d 605 (Orange). Application in criminal case for leave to appeal…