Opinion
June 5, 1995
Appeal from the County Court, Putnam County (Sweeny, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the court erred in denying suppression of 56 vials of crack cocaine, which were all contained in one paper bag. Inasmuch as the bag was recovered a distance of several feet from the parked vehicle in which the defendant was a passenger and the defendant never asserted any property or possessory interest in this bag, suppression was properly denied since this property had been abandoned (see, People v. Howard, 50 N.Y.2d 583, 593, cert denied 449 U.S. 1023; People v. Boodle, 47 N.Y.2d 398, 402-404, cert denied 444 U.S. 969). Thus, no Fourth Amendment rights of the defendant were implicated (see, People v. Bloomfield, 156 A.D.2d 572, 573; see also, People v. Jones, 171 A.D.2d 814, 815).
Because the police improperly questioned the defendant prior to advising him of his Miranda rights, his statements denying knowledge and ownership of the crack vials found in the paper bag should have been suppressed (see, e.g., People v. Stewart, 41 N.Y.2d 65, 70). However, the erroneous admission of these statements was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237-238).
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 beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, P.J., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.