People v. Zaporta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Zaporta

186 A.D.2d 374, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11199

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 6, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 374 (People v. Zaporta) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Zaporta, 186 A.D.2d 374, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11199 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen G. Crane, J., at suppression hearing and jury trial), rendered July 9, 1990, convicting defendant of robbery in the first degree and grand larceny in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a predicate felony offender, to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 12 Vá to 25 years, unanimously affirmed.

The hearing court properly admitted statements made by defendant to the police as spontaneous utterances and not the product of custodial questioning designed to elicit an incriminating response (People v Gamble, 129 AD2d 470, 475, affd 70 NY2d 885).

Defendant failed to object to testimony of the arresting officer that he now claims constituted impermissible bolstering, and thus failed to preserve the issue for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05). Were we to review this claim in the interest of justice, we would find it to be without merit.

We have reviewed defendant’s additional claims of error and find them to be without merit. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Ross and Kassal, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen G. Crane, J., at suppression hearing and jury trial), rendered July 9, 1990, convicting defendant of robbery in the first degree and grand larceny in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a predicate felony offender, to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 12 Vá to 25 years, unanimously affirmed.

The hearing court properly admitted statements made by defendant to the police as spontaneous utterances and not the product of custodial questioning designed to elicit an incriminating response (People v Gamble, 129 AD2d 470, 475, affd 70 NY2d 885).

Defendant failed to object to testimony of the arresting officer that he now claims constituted impermissible bolstering, and thus failed to preserve the issue for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05). Were we to review this claim in the interest of justice, we would find it to be without merit.

We have reviewed defendant’s additional claims of error and find them to be without merit. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Ross and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 374, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-zaporta-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack