Opinion
2000-03457.
Decided March 15, 2004.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Latella, J.), rendered March 30, 2000, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Rotker, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress his statement to law enforcement officials.
Laura R. Johnson, New York, N.Y. (David Crow of counsel; John Ciulla on the brief), for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano and Sharon Y. Brodt of counsel; Lorrie A. Zinno on the brief), for respondent.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., HOWARD MILLER, STEPHEN G. CRANE, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, his statement to the police was spontaneous and not the result of the functional equivalent of interrogation ( see People v. Stockdale, 270 A.D.2d 294; People v. Little, 204 A.D.2d 351; People v. Hawthorne, 145 A.D.2d 569). Therefore, the hearing court properly declined to suppress the statement.
The defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, raised in his supplemental pro se brief, is primarily based on matter dehors the record which cannot be reviewed on direct appeal ( see People v. Zimmerman, 309 A.D.2d 824, lv denied N.Y.3d [Jan. 28, 2004]; People v. Wingate, 297 A.D.2d 761). However, to the extent that such claim is reviewable, the record demonstrates that the defendant received meaningful representation ( see People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
RITTER, J.P., H. MILLER, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.