Opinion
June 29, 1987
Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Friedlander, J.).
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
The evidence adduced at the suppression hearing demonstrates that the defendant's statements to the police were not the product of intoxication and were voluntarily given by the defendant after a valid waiver of his Miranda rights. Accordingly, Criminal Term's determination denying suppression should not be disturbed (see, People v Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585, mot to amend remittitur denied 26 N.Y.2d 845, 883, cert denied 400 U.S. 851).
The evidence adduced at trial, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient as a matter of law to sustain the defendant's convictions (see, People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932). 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).
The sentencing court properly determined that the defendant's predicate felony conviction was not constitutionally infirm (CPL 400.21), and the sentence imposed upon him was appropriate under the circumstances (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (CPL 210.30; People v McGrath, 115 A.D.2d 128, 129, lv denied 67 N.Y.2d 654; People v Sorge, 301 N.Y. 198; People v Schwartzman, 24 N.Y.2d 241, rearg denied 24 N.Y.2d 916, cert denied 396 U.S. 846; People v Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371). Mangano, J.P., Niehoff, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.