People v. Bhattacharjee
| Decision Date | 06 May 2008 |
| Docket Number | 2004-10163. |
| Citation | 857 N.Y.S.2d 499,51 A.D.3d 684,2008 NY Slip Op 04364 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. SUDEEP BHATTACHARJEE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the facts and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by providing that the sentences imposed on counts two, seven, and eight of the indictment shall run concurrently with each other and with the sentences imposed under the remaining 13 counts of the indictment; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly denied those branches of the defendant's omnibus motion which were to suppress physical evidence and his statements to law enforcement officials. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the rule of Payton v New York (445 US 573 [1980]) is not implicated here, as the evidence established that the defendant's arrest was not effected in his home (see People v Kim, 2 AD3d 878 [2003]; People v Dollison, 221 AD2d 654, 655 [1995]). In any event, there was sufficient evidence in the record to support the hearing court's conclusion that the defendant consented to the police entry into his home (see People v Kalaj, 247 AD2d 633 [1998]; People v Thomas, 223 AD2d 612 [1996]). Furthermore, credibility determinations of a hearing court are accorded great deference on appeal, and will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see People v Britton, 49 AD3d 893 [2008]; People v Francis, 44 AD3d 788, 789 [2007]). There is no basis to disturb those findings here (see People v Knudsen, 34 AD3d 496, 497 [2006]).
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. DiPippo
...finding trial counsel credible ( see People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380; People v. Bhattacharjee, 51 A.D.3d 684, 857 N.Y.S.2d 499; People v. Britton, 49 A.D.3d 893, 894, 853 N.Y.S.2d 897; People v. Francis, 44 A.D.3d 788, 789, 843 N.Y.S.2d 419; cf. Peo......
-
People v. Malaspina
...53 A.D.3d 622 [2d Dept 2008] (credibility determinations made by suppression court are entitled to great weight), People v. Bhattacharjee, 51 A.D.3d 684 [2d Dept 2008] (same), People v. Wynter, 48 A.D.3d 492 [2d Dept 2008] (same)]. The undisputed testimony is that P.O. Muscente has been inv......
-
People v. Toussaint
...had a good faith reasonable belief that the complainant was 17 years of age or over (see Penal Law § 263.20[1] ; People v. Bhattacharjee, 51 A.D.3d 684, 685, 857 N.Y.S.2d 499 ). The defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence underlying his convictions of attempted rape i......
-
People v. Nielsen
...68 N.Y.2d 952, 953, 510 N.Y.S.2d 87, 502 N.E.2d 1002; People v. Cameron, 74 A.D.3d 1223, 1224, 905 N.Y.S.2d 619; People v. Bhattacharjee, 51 A.D.3d 684, 684, 857 N.Y.S.2d 499; People v. Morales, 250 A.D.2d 782, 783, 672 N.Y.S.2d 782; People v. Dollison, 221 A.D.2d 654, 655, 634 N.Y.S.2d 194......