Opinion
2015-05-27
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Julio BORRELL, appellant.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Kendra L. Hutchinson of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano and Edward D. Saslaw of counsel), for respondent.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Kendra L. Hutchinson of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano and Edward D. Saslaw of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McGann, J.), dated June 10, 2010, as denied, without a hearing, that branch of his motion which was pursuant to CPL 440.30(1–a) for DNA testing of certain evidence.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from.
The Supreme Court properly denied, without a hearing, that branch of the defendant's motion which was pursuant to CPL 440.30(1–a) for DNA testing of certain evidence, since the defendant failed to show that there was a reasonable probability that the verdict would have been more favorable to him had the DNA tests been performed and the results admitted at trial ( seeCPL 440.30[1–a][a][1]; People v. Bellezza, 119 A.D.3d 598, 598–599, 987 N.Y.S.2d 876; People v. Johnson, 112 A.D.3d 969, 969–970, 976 N.Y.S.2d 895; People v. Perry, 89 A.D.3d 1114, 1115, 933 N.Y.S.2d 584).
The defendant's remaining contentions, raised in his pro se supplemental brief, are not properly raised on this appeal ( seeCPL 450.10).