Opinion
March 10, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
The evidence adduced at trial, viewed in a light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Giuliano, 65 N.Y.2d 766, 768; People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied, 469 U.S. 932; People v. Kennedy, 47 N.Y.2d 196, 203), was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crimes of which he was convicted.
The defendant contends that his statements to the police should have been suppressed since they resulted from an arrest under nonexigent circumstances effected at his home without a warrant. The defendant concedes that this particular issue was not raised at the suppression hearing and, therefore, was not preserved for appellate review (see, People v. Grosfeld, 58 N.Y.2d 887; People v. Gonzalez, 55 N.Y.2d 887, 888; People v. Smith, 55 N.Y.2d 888, 890). Nevertheless, the defendant urges us to reverse his conviction on this ground in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. We are not persuaded that the circumstances of this matter merit the exercise of our discretion and, therefore, we decline to review the substance of the defendant's argument in this regard (see, People v. Sellers, 103 A.D.2d 784; People v. Nieves, 102 A.D.2d 858; People v Jennings, 94 A.D.2d 802).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Eiber, JJ., concur.