From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. DaCosta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 22, 1994
201 A.D.2d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

February 22, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ivan Warner, J.).


Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People and recognizing that credibility is for the trier of facts (People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), we find that the evidence was legally sufficient, and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490).

The People established beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant's statement was voluntary even though defendant refused to sign a Miranda warnings card (People v. Danaher, 115 A.D.2d 905, 906). Defendant failed to preserve his claim that the summary of his statement, which was composed by the detective and unsigned by defendant, was inadmissible, and we decline to review in the interest of justice. Were we to review, we would find it without merit because there was evidence that the statement was read to defendant, who orally acknowledged its accuracy (see, People v. Lee, 159 A.D.2d 238, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 791).

The court did not abuse its discretion in excluding testimony that the complainant had made threats to defendant's common-law wife in the year preceding the incident. This testimony, although offered as evidence of such bias by the complainant toward defendant, was remote, and the jury already had before it ample, and more direct, evidence of bias (see, People v. Brooks, 131 N.Y. 321, 326-327).

Finally, the claim of right defense (Penal Law § 155.15) had no applicability to the larceny charge in this case.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Asch and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. DaCosta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 22, 1994
201 A.D.2d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. DaCosta

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MICHAEL DaCOSTA…

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

Date published: Feb 22, 1994

Citations

201 A.D.2d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
607 N.Y.S.2d 933

Citing Cases

State v. Voymas

The record establishes that defendant was given a copy of the statement, that he made numerous corrections to…

People v. Walsh

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in limiting the cross-examination of the prosecution…