From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Young

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1985
111 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

June 3, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

The record indicates that defendant was properly advised of his Miranda rights and that he understood and spoke English sufficiently to knowingly and voluntarily waive them. Since the Judge at the suppression hearing actually observed defendant and heard the testimony, his determination in this regard should not be disturbed. Defendant has advanced no persuasive reason for us to find that the hearing court was in error ( People v. Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585, cert denied 400 U.S. 851).

In addition, we perceive no basis for concluding that the sentence warrants modification in the interest of justice ( People v. Towns, 109 A.D.2d 764; People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816). Thompson, J.P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Young

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1985
111 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

People v. Young

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KIM YOUNG, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 3, 1985

Citations

111 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

People v. Sims

We see no reason to disturb these findings on appeal. Finally, we conclude that none of the other contentions…

People v. Knowles

Defendant's claim that he was prejudiced by portions of the prosecutor's summation has not been preserved for…