People v. Esquilin
| Decision Date | 08 September 1994 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Shaborn ESQUILIN, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and CARRO, ELLERIN and ASCH, JJ.
Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Alvin Schlesinger, J.), rendered October 16, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree, manslaughter in the first degree and attempted robbery in the third degree, and, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 22 years to life, 8 1/3 to 25 years, 1 1/3 to 4 years, and 3 1/3 to 10 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
The record supports the trial court's determination that the prosecutor offered race-neutral reasons for excluding a black female juror (People v. Hernandez, 75 N.Y.2d 350, 553 N.Y.S.2d 85, 552 N.E.2d 621, affd. 500 U.S. 352, 111 S.Ct. 1859, 114 L.Ed.2d 395; People v. Castro, 200 A.D.2d 359, 606 N.Y.S.2d 180, lv. denied 82 N.Y.2d 923, 610 N.Y.S.2d 174, 632 N.E.2d 484).
Defendant's inculpatory written statement to a detective and his exculpatory videotape statement to a prosecutor five hours later were not part of a single custodial interrogation (People v. Vientos, 164 A.D.2d 122, 127, 561 N.Y.S.2d 443, affd. 79 N.Y.2d 771, 579 N.Y.S.2d 633, 587 N.E.2d 271), and the videotape statement, offered to impeach the officer who took defendant's original statement, was properly excluded as inadmissible hearsay (People v. Reynoso, 73 N.Y.2d 816, 818-819, 537 N.Y.S.2d 113, 534 N.E.2d 30).
Defendant's attempt to hide the gun immediately after the shooting demonstrated that his remark was "made under the impetus of studied reflection" while fleeing from the scene (People v. Edwards, 47 N.Y.2d 493, 497, 419 N.Y.S.2d 45, 392 N.E.2d 1229).
Given the variations in the conditions of a courtroom and a moving train, it was not an abuse of discretion for the court to prevent defendant and his attorney from demonstrating defendant's struggle with the decedent (see, People v. Scarola, 71 N.Y.2d 769, 777, 530 N.Y.S.2d 83, 525 N.E.2d 728).
We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- In re Naples
-
People v. Simpson
...at 497, 419 N.Y.S.2d 45, 392 N.E.2d 1229; see also, People v. Brown, 70 N.Y.2d 513, 522 N.Y.S.2d 837, 517 N.E.2d 515; People v. Esquilin, 207 A.D.2d 686, 616 N.Y.S.2d 364; People v. Lee, 177 A.D.2d 288, 576 N.Y.S.2d 97; People v. Russell, 161 A.D.2d 815, 556 N.Y.S.2d 143). In my view, her p......
-
People v. Moolenaar
...by the People would be sufficient to prevent this evidence from confusing and misleading the jury (see, People v. Esquilin, 207 A.D.2d 686, 616 N.Y.S.2d 364, lv. denied 84 N.Y.2d 907, 621 N.Y.S.2d 524, 645 N.E.2d 1224; People v. Gregg, 203 A.D.2d 188, 189, 611 N.Y.S.2d 151, lv. denied 83 N.......
-
Morgenthau v. Altman
... ... Contrary to the Court of Appeals' holding in People v. Paperno, 54 N.Y.2d 294, 296, 303, 445 N.Y.S.2d 119, 429 N.E.2d 797, the motion was granted despite the absence of "a significant showing that the ... ...