Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. RODRIGUEZ

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Nov 4, 2009
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence ( see People v Blasich, 73 NY2d 673, 678; People v Martin, 28 AD3d 583, 584; People v Parris, 26 AD3d 393, 394). Further, the trial court correctly determined that a statement made by the defendant's brother before his death was not admissible as a dying declaration ( see People v Nieves, 67 NY2d 125, 132; People v Becker, 215 NY 126, 145 [1915]; People v Acomb, 87 AD2d 1, 10).

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that certain comments made by the prosecutor during summation deprived him of a fair trial because he failed to object to the subject remarks ( see CPL 470.05; People v Lanier, 53 AD3d 588, 589). In any event, the challenged remarks were fair comment on the evidence and responsive to defense counsel's summation ( see People v Rudd, 62 AD3d 729, lv denied 12 NY3d 929; People v Capehart, 61 AD3d 885, 887, lv denied 13 NY3d 742).