Opinion
Argued February 8, 2000
March 17, 2000
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D'Emic, J.), rendered September 18, 1997, convicting him of murder in the second degree and robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Brill, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress statements made by him to law enforcement officials.
M. Sue Wycoff, New York, N.Y. (Elizabeth B. Emmons of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Roseann B. MacKechnie, Florence M. Sullivan, and Karen Marcus of counsel), for respondent.
LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., DAVID S. RITTER, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, LEO F. McGINITY, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
We decline to disturb the Supreme Court's determination that the police had a reasonable suspicion to approach and thereafter pursue the defendant, which then ripened into probable cause to arrest him (see, People v. DeBour, 40 N.Y.2d 210).
The defendant did not preserve for appellate review his contention that the Supreme Court erred in failing to charge the jury that the prosecution had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he made inculpatory statements to the police (see, CPL 470.05 Crim. Proc.[2]). In any event, the charge as a whole was proper. Moreover, the Supreme Court did not invade the jury's province and remove from its consideration the essential question of fact, i.e., whether the defendant made the statements (see, People v. Quinn, 185 A.D.2d 288; cf., People v. Martin, 115 A.D.2d 565).
BRACKEN, J.P., RITTER, ALTMAN, and McGINITY, JJ., concur.