Opinion
October 19, 1987
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Marasco, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the suppression court's determination that his incriminating statements were voluntarily made after being fully advised of his Miranda rights is amply supported by the evidence and accordingly will not be disturbed on appeal (see, People v. Armstead, 98 A.D.2d 726). Moreover, the court's Sandoval ruling permitting the prosecution to cross-examine the defendant about his seven prior convictions did not constitute an abuse of discretion (see, People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371).
Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in a light most favorable to the People, we find that the evidence is sufficient as a matter of law to support the defendant's conviction of the crimes charged (see, People v. Lewis, 64 N.Y.2d 1111; People v. Conyers, 130 A.D.2d 677). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the evidence established the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
Although we find that the admission into evidence of Richard Abagnale's hearsay statement against the defendant was improper, the error was harmless in view of the overwhelming proof of his guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230). Niehoff, J.P., Mangano, Bracken and Eiber, JJ., concur.