PEOPLE v. SQUIRE (2025)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ruth Pickholz, J.), entered on or about February 5, 2024, which denied, without a hearing, defendant's CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment of conviction, same court (Thomas A. Farber), rendered May 17, 2011, as amended June 6, 2011, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant's CPL 440.10 motion claiming violations of the People's disclosure obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) and (People v. Rosario, 9 N.Y.2d 286, 213 N.Y.S.2d 448, 173 N.E.2d 881 [1961], cert denied 368 U.S. 866, 82 S.Ct. 117, 7 L.Ed.2d 64 [1961]).  Only one of the police follow-up reports defendant addresses constituted a statement of a witness related to the subject matter of his testimony (see People v. Fridman, 162 A.D.2d 136, 138, 556 N.Y.S.2d 565 [1st Dept. 1990], lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 893, 561 N.Y.S.2d 555, 562 N.E.2d 880 [1990]) and the record clearly shows that this report was disclosed to the defense.  Similarly, the only report that contained exculpatory matter recounted defendant's statement to police after his arrest.  “Evidence is not suppressed where the defendant ‘knew of, or should reasonably have known of, the evidence and its exculpatory nature’ ” (People v. LaValle, 3 N.Y.3d 88, 110, 783 N.Y.S.2d 485, 817 N.E.2d 341 [2004], quoting People v. Doshi, 93 N.Y.2d 499, 506, 693 N.Y.S.2d 87, 715 N.E.2d 113 [1999]).

Because defendant fails to establish any Brady or Rosario violation, his contention that counsel's failure to pursue such claims constituted ineffective assistance of counsel is unavailing (see Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 [1984];  People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584 [1998];  People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400 [1981]).