Opinion
December 7, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We agree with the hearing court's determination denying those branches of the defendant's omnibus motion which were to suppress physical evidence and statements for reasons stated by Justice Tomei in his memorandum decision dated April 29, 1982.
The defendant's present contention that the admission of certain testimony was violative of the parent-child privilege is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as it was neither raised at the suppression hearing nor cited as a ground for objection to the admission of the evidence at trial (see, People v Harrell, 59 N.Y.2d 620). In any event, we find no substantive merit to the defendant's argument. The circumstances which may give rise to a parent-child privilege, i.e., when "a minor, under arrest for a serious crime, seeks the guidance and advice of a parent in the unfriendly environs of a police precinct" (People v Harrell, 87 A.D.2d 21, 26, affd 59 N.Y.2d 620, supra) were not present herein (see, People v Tesh, 124 A.D.2d 843, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 750; People v Gloskey, 105 A.D.2d 871; Matter of Mark G., 65 A.D.2d 917).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court's supplemental instructions to the jury on circumstantial evidence properly conveyed the applicable legal principles (see, People v Malloy, 55 N.Y.2d 296, cert denied 459 U.S. 847; People v Valdivia, 108 A.D.2d 885).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, as we must (People v Benzinger, 36 N.Y.2d 29), the evidence is legally sufficient to support the defendant's conviction (see, People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932). 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 (CPL 470.15) inasmuch as the "facts viewed as a whole * * * exclude `to a moral certainty' every conclusion other than guilt" (People v Kennedy, 47 N.Y.2d 196, 202, rearg dismissed 48 N.Y.2d 656; People v Benzinger, supra, at 32). Rubin, J.P., Kooper, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.