Opinion
June 8, 1999.
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie Wittner, J.).
The verdicts were based on legally sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence. Contrary to defendant Mitchell's argument, there was ample evidence linking him to each of the crimes, as well as ample corroboration of accomplice testimony, including extensive police observations.
Defendant Hudson's challenge to the geographical jurisdiction of New York County is both waived and without merit, for the reasons stated by this Court in connection with a similar claim made by a codefendant ( People v. Green, 235 A.D.2d 284, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1035).
Hudson's motion to suppress evidence obtained through a search warrant was properly denied. We find nothing "stale" about the information supporting the warrant application, some of which information was only a few hours old, and conclude that the informant's reliability and basis of knowledge were amply established.
Mitchell's motion to suppress identification testimony was properly denied. We see no reason to disturb the court's credibility determinations.
The court's response to a note from the deliberating jury was a proper exercise of discretion ( see, People v. Malloy, 55 N.Y.2d 296, cert denied 459 U.S. 847).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
We have considered and rejected each defendant's remaining claims.
Concur — Williams, J.P., Wallach, Andrias and Friedman, JJ.