People v. Betancourt
| Decision Date | 08 May 2013 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Daniel BETANCOURT, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
106 A.D.3d 831
964 N.Y.S.2d 264
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 03339
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Daniel BETANCOURT, appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 8, 2013.
[964 N.Y.S.2d 265]
Tully Rinckey, PLLC, Albany, N.Y. (David Fallon of counsel), for appellant.
Daniel M. Donovan, Jr., District Attorney, Staten Island, N.Y. (Morrie I. Kleinbart and Michael Shollar of counsel), for respondent.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, SANDRA L. SGROI, and JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.
[106 A.D.3d 831]Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered April 22, 2008, convicting him of murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review [106 A.D.3d 832]the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, a review of the totality of the circumstances surrounding his questioning by the police demonstrates that his statements, which were preceded by his valid waiver of properly administered Miranda warnings ( see Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694), were voluntarily made ( see People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 415–416, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053,cert. denied542 U.S. 946, 124 S.Ct. 2929, 159 L.Ed.2d 828;People v. DeCampoamor, 91 A.D.3d 669, 670–671, 936 N.Y.S.2d 256). In this regard, the actions of the police in periodically questioning him over a seven-hour period while he
remained in damp clothing did not render his resulting statements involuntary ( see People v. Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1, 12–13, 427 N.Y.S.2d 944, 405 N.E.2d 188;People v. DeCampoamor, 91 A.D.3d at 670–671, 936 N.Y.S.2d 256;People v. Miles, 276 A.D.2d 566, 714 N.Y.S.2d 714;People v. Starks, 139 A.D.2d 681, 682, 527 N.Y.S.2d 358). Moreover, there is no evidence that the defendant's physical condition impaired or undermined his ability to freely choose whether to make a statement ( see People v. Williams, 97 A.D.3d 769, 770, 948 N.Y.S.2d 428;People v. Legere, 81 A.D.3d 746, 747–748, 916 N.Y.S.2d 187;People v. Timmons, 54 A.D.3d 883, 884–885, 864 N.Y.S.2d 111;People v. Braithwaite, 286 A.D.2d 507, 507, 729 N.Y.S.2d 636).
Similarly, the trial court providently exercised its discretion in ruling...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Calderon
...A.D.3d 652, 653, 975 N.Y.S.2d 771 [prior attempted robbery conviction, in prosecution for robbery and burglary]; People v. Betancourt, 106 A.D.3d 831, 832, 964 N.Y.S.2d 264 [prior uncharged larcenies, in prosecution for robbery and murder]; People v. Lewis, 101 A.D.3d 1154, 956 N.Y.S.2d 526......
-
Donnelly v. St. Agnes Cathedral Sch.
...infant plaintiff's accident, and that the premises had passed a State-mandated fire safety inspection approximately one month before [964 N.Y.S.2d 264]the incident. With this evidence, the defendant established, prima facie, that the fire door was not defective and that the defendant did no......
-
People v. Rivera
...own interests above those of society (see People v. Gray, 84 N.Y.2d 709, 712, 622 N.Y.S.2d 223, 646 N.E.2d 444 ; People v. Betancourt, 106 A.D.3d 831, 832, 964 N.Y.S.2d 264 ; People v. Beckett, 186 A.D.2d 209, 210, 587 N.Y.S.2d 753 ). Similarly unavailing is the defendant's contention that ......
-
People v. Murray
...She was allowed to smoke, go to the bathroom, given food and water and a blanket when she became too cold (See, People v. Betancourt, 106 A.D. 3d 831; People v. Garcia, 216 A.D.2d 319, appeal denied 86 N.Y.2d 842; People v. Towndrow, 236 A.D.2d 821; appeal denied 89 N.Y. 2d 1016). She was p......