Opinion
June 17, 1985
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bernstein, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
In the instant case the primary issue in finding that defendant freely and voluntarily waived his constitutional rights was one of credibility. Since the hearing court's findings were not clearly erroneous, they should be upheld ( People v. Armstead, 98 A.D.2d 726). The circumstances in this case do not indicate that the police denied defendant's parents access to him in an effort to bar the exercise of defendant's right to counsel ( People v Crimmins, 64 N.Y.2d 1072; People v. Fuschino, 59 N.Y.2d 91; People v. Casassa, 49 N.Y.2d 668, cert denied 449 U.S. 842; cf. People v Bevilacqua, 45 N.Y.2d 508). In addition, we have viewed the videotape of defendant's interrogation by an Assistant District Attorney and find it demonstrated that defendant understood his Miranda rights and made a knowing and intelligent waiver of those rights. Under the totality of the circumstances and the rules of appellate review, defendant's statements were given to the police voluntarily ( see, People v. Casassa, supra; People v Anderson, 42 N.Y.2d 35, 38). Lazer, J.P., Gibbons, O'Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.