From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Sheridan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 12, 1999
265 A.D.2d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Argued June 29, 1999

October 12, 1999

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing court properly found that the absence of Miranda warnings during the initial conversation at the hospital emergency room did not render certain statements inadmissible, since he was not in police custody at the time they were made ( see, People v. Sohn, 148 A.D.2d 553, 556; People v. Woods, 141 A.D.2d 588).

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of vehicular assault in the second degree ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( see, CPL 470. 15[5]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

JOY, J.P., FRIEDMANN, SCHMIDT, and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Sheridan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 12, 1999
265 A.D.2d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Sheridan

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. GERARD SHERIDAN, appellant. (Ind. No…

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

Date published: Oct 12, 1999

Citations

265 A.D.2d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
697 N.Y.S.2d 77

Citing Cases

People v. Claros

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention…