From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Brewley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 5, 1993
192 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

April 5, 1993

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's claim that the five-month delay between his sale of cocaine to an undercover police officer and his arrest deprived him of his constitutional right to due process of law is without merit. Where there is good cause for the delay in prosecuting the defendant, the delay does not constitute a violation of due process (see, People v Singer, 44 N.Y.2d 241; People v Donovan, 141 A.D.2d 835, 836; People v Brown, 124 A.D.2d 667). In the present case, the police were involved in an ongoing narcotics investigation and the defendant's arrest would have revealed the undercover officer's identity and resulted in the discontinuation of the investigation. Moreover, there is no indication in the record that the police delayed arresting the defendant in order to gain a tactical advantage or that the defendant suffered prejudice as a result of the delay. Therefore, the delay did not deprive the defendant of due process (see, People v Donovan, supra; People v Connor, 137 A.D.2d 701).

Nor did the police officers' request that the defendant produce identification shortly after the drug transaction, on the pretext that they were investigating a robbery, deprive him of due process of law. Although the police conduct involved a measure of guile, it was not so fundamentally unfair as to deprive the defendant of due process (see, People v Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1, 11; People v Sohn, 148 A.D.2d 553). Moreover, at the time the police requested the defendant's identification, he was not in custody. Therefore, the defendant's rights to counsel and to remain silent had not yet attached and the police were not required to read the defendant the Miranda warnings (see, Miranda v Arizona, 384 U.S. 436).

Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Lawrence and O'Brien, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Brewley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 5, 1993
192 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Brewley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEN BREWLEY, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 5, 1993

Citations

192 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
596 N.Y.S.2d 91

Citing Cases

People v. Walls

The defendant made additional inculpatory statements, and shortly thereafter he was released pending further…

People v. Tankleff

However, it is also clear to us that the type of trickery employed by Detective McCready in this case was not…