From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Benefield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 15, 1994
203 A.D.2d 925 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

April 15, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Rossetti, J.

Present — Pine, J.P., Lawton, Fallon, Davis and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We conclude that legally sufficient evidence was presented, which, viewed in the light most favorable to the People, could have been found by a rational trier of the facts to have established the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 U.S. 932; People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621).

Defendant contends that the suppression court erred in denying his motion to suppress his statement and certain physical evidence as the fruits of his unlawful arrest. We agree. Reversal is not required, however, because the error is harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt. There is no reasonable possibility that the admission of that evidence contributed to defendant's conviction (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237; People v McPhee, 168 A.D.2d 984, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 998).


Summaries of

People v. Benefield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 15, 1994
203 A.D.2d 925 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Benefield

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. GRANT BENEFIELD…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Apr 15, 1994

Citations

203 A.D.2d 925 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
612 N.Y.S.2d 1008

Citing Cases

People v. Rivas

The People presented other evidence of the jealous nature of defendant, his infatuation with the victim and…