Opinion
March 14, 1994
Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Weissman, J.).
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
The defendant was arrested on a bench warrant regarding a prior pending unrelated charge of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle upon which the defendant was represented by counsel. After the defendant was read his Miranda rights, he waived his rights and made statements regarding the instant charge of burglary in the second degree. The defendant was not questioned about the prior pending unrelated charge. Accordingly, the defendant effectively waived his Miranda rights, and the hearing court properly denied suppression of the defendant's statements (see, People v Cawley, 76 N.Y.2d 331; People v. Scott, 197 A.D.2d 646; People v Torres, 165 A.D.2d 771).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom (see, People v. Way, 59 N.Y.2d 361; People v. Montanez, 41 N.Y.2d 53, 57), we conclude that the defendant's guilt was established by evidence that (1) the burglarized house appeared to have been broken into, (2) the defendant stipulated that the fingerprints found inside the house on a kitchen cabinet were his fingerprints, (3) the defendant was not authorized to enter the house, and (4) numerous items of property were missing from the house (see, People v. Thomas, 128 A.D.2d 743).
Further, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, we find that it was legally sufficient to establish that the house was a "dwelling", which is defined as "a building which is usually occupied by a person lodging therein at night" (Penal Law § 140.00; People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620; People v. Covington, 199 A.D.2d 528).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.