People v. McIver
| Decision Date | 28 February 2005 |
| Docket Number | 2003-09622. |
| Citation | 15 A.D.3d 677,2005 NY Slip Op 01559,791 N.Y.S.2d 587 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JESSICA McIVER, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
"An effective waiver of Miranda rights [see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 (1966)] may be made by an accused of subnormal intelligence so long as it is established that he or she understood the immediate meaning of the warnings" (People v Williams, 62 NY2d 285, 287 [1984]; see People v Fergus, 270 AD2d 357, 358 [2000]; People v Williams, 186 AD2d 770, 771 [1992]; People v Zuluaga, 148 AD2d 480, 481 [1989]). On this record, we find no reason to disturb the hearing court's findings that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived her Miranda rights and voluntarily made statements to law enforcement officials.
Moreover, we find no error in the trial court's decision to allow the five-year-old complainant to testify under oath, as she adequately demonstrated, upon voir dire, that she appreciated the difference between truth and falsehood, the necessity for telling the truth, and the fact that a witness may be punished for telling a lie in court (see CPL 60.20 [2]; People v Nisoff, 36 NY2d 560, 565-566 [1975]; People v McCall, 277 AD2d 467, 468 [2000]; People v Dorsey, 265 AD2d 567, 568 [1999]; People v Ford, 155 AD2d 863 [1989], affd 76 NY2d 868 [1990]; People v Rivers, 145 AD2d 319 [1988]). In any event, on this record, the complainant could properly have been permitted to testify as an unsworn witness (see CPL 60.20 [2]), and, because her testimony was sufficiently corroborated by other evidence (see People v Groff, 71 NY2d 101 [1987]), including the defendant's own statements to the police, any error in permitting the complainant to testify under oath would have been harmless (see People v Pullman, 234 AD2d 955 [1996]; People v Lynch, 216 AD2d 929 [1995]; People v Green, 181 AD2d 1060 [1992]).
Moreover, the court's determination to deny youthful offender treatment to the defendant was a provident exercise of discretion (see CPL 720.20; People v Ferguson, 285 AD2d 901 [2001]; People v Wallace, 246 AD2d 676 [1998]; People v LaGrange, 115 AD2d 149 [1985]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Stalter
...Morales, 80 N.Y.2d at 453, 591 N.Y.S.2d 825, 606 N.E.2d 953; People v. Mendoza, 49 A.D.3d at 560, 853 N.Y.S.2d 364; People v. McIver, 15 A.D.3d 677, 678, 791 N.Y.S.2d 587). Contrary to the defendant's contention, he had no right to personally attend the County Court's examination of the chi......
-
People v. Ramos
...638 ; People v. Mendoza, 49 A.D.3d 559, 853 N.Y.S.2d 364 ; Matter of James N., 19 A.D.3d 1047, 796 N.Y.S.2d 468 ; People v. McIver, 15 A.D.3d 677, 791 N.Y.S.2d 587 ). Contrary to the defendant's contention, because defense counsel assailed the testimony of the complainant on cross-examinati......
-
People v. Hines
...had constituted error, it would not require reversal (see People v. Mendoza, 49 A.D.3d at 560, 853 N.Y.S.2d 364 ; People v. McIver, 15 A.D.3d 677, 678, 791 N.Y.S.2d 587 ; People v. Morey, 224 A.D.2d 730, 731–732, 637 N.Y.S.2d 500 ).The defendant's contention that he received ineffective ass......
-
People v. Sahadeo
...953 ; People v. Stalter, 77 A.D.3d 776, 909 N.Y.S.2d 516 ; People v. Mendoza, 49 A.D.3d at 560, 853 N.Y.S.2d 364 ; People v. McIver, 15 A.D.3d 677, 678, 791 N.Y.S.2d 587 ). Finally, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ), and the fact ......
-
Witness
...“possessed sufficient intelligence and capacity to justify her unsworn testimony.” (internal citations omitted). People v. McIver , 791 N.Y.S.2d 587, 588-89 (App. Div.), appeal denied , 831 N.E.2d 979 (N.Y. 2005). The trial court did not err in allowing a five-year-old complainant to testif......