From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Benjamin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 8, 1990
161 A.D.2d 254 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

May 8, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, Bernard Fried, J.


After trial defendant was convicted of assaulting his infant son. In three statements to the authorities, defendant explained that his four-year-old son was a wild child who needed discipline. The evidence showed that the defendant beat the child, who had awakened during the night and taken a drink from an old soda bottle. For several minutes defendant hit his son with a plastic bat.

Before trial defendant moved to suppress his statements. He advanced the narrow contention that his confessions were coerced or the product of improper inducement. At the hearing, defendant testified that the investigating detective physically and verbally abused him. Defendant claimed that he had not received the Miranda warnings, but had been offered protective custody if he made a statement.

Defendant's claim on appeal that his confessions should have been suppressed because his arrest was not supported by probable cause has not been preserved. (Cf., People v. Martin, 50 N.Y.2d 1029; People v. Tutt, 38 N.Y.2d 1011.) Moreover, if the issue were to be considered in the interest of justice, we would nevertheless affirm. The custodial interrogations were supported by probable cause. The circumstances of the infant's injuries were manifestly criminal. Defendant's paramour had made statements linking herself and another to the beating, and the circumstances plainly suggested that the beatings had taken place recently in the apartment. Defendant was connected to the apartment not only by his presence in the bedroom when the detectives arrived, but by an earlier statement that he had tried to resuscitate the infant. The circumstances support probable cause, because they make it "at least more probable than not that a crime has taken place and that the one arrested [was] its perpetrator". (People v. Carrasquillo, 54 N.Y.2d 248, 254.)

We also find no merit to defendant's claim that the trial court abused its sentencing discretion.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ross, Asch and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Benjamin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 8, 1990
161 A.D.2d 254 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Benjamin

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PAUL BENJAMIN…

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

Date published: May 8, 1990

Citations

161 A.D.2d 254 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
554 N.Y.S.2d 902