Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. ROSARIO

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Dec 4, 1995

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant and his codefendant (see, People v DeJesus, 222 A.D.2d 449 [decided herewith]) were apprehended in the vicinity of a dumpster shortly after they committed a burglary at 575 Warren Street, Brooklyn. The two men were immediately identified at the scene by two civilian witnesses. The defendant claims that he is entitled to a new trial because the Supreme Court "allow[ed] the prosecution to use the defendants' alleged statement that they were looking in the dumpster for cans". Even assuming that this statement should have been suppressed (cf., People v Johnson, 86 A.D.2d 165, 168, affd 59 N.Y.2d 1014, 1016), it is clear that any error connected with the admission of this statement must be considered harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242).

We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.