Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Marc A. MADORE, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10[1] ). We reject the contention of defendant that County Court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements made upon his arrest. The police found defendant hiding in the bushes while they were searching for the person responsible for the assault, and their inquiries concerned the identity of defendant and his reason for hiding. Those inquiries were “designed to clarify the nature of the situation confronted, rather than to coerce a statement” (People v. Huffman, 41 N.Y.2d 29, 34, 390 N.Y.S.2d 843, 359 N.E.2d 353). Thus, Miranda warnings were not required (see, People v. Walker, 267 A.D.2d 778, 779-780, 701 N.Y.S.2d 166, lv. denied 94 N.Y.2d 926, 708 N.Y.S.2d 366, 729 N.E.2d 1165; People v. Albano, 124 A.D.2d 739, 508 N.Y.S.2d 243, lv. denied 69 N.Y.2d 824, 513 N.Y.S.2d 1030, 506 N.E.2d 541).
The belated mistrial motion by defendant did not preserve for our review his contention that he was denied a fair trial by a comment made by the prosecutor on summation (see, People v. Warrick, 261 A.D.2d 152, 690 N.Y.S.2d 194; People v. Valez, 256 A.D.2d 135, 682 N.Y.S.2d 162, lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 879, 689 N.Y.S.2d 441, 711 N.E.2d 655). In any event, the court's curative instruction was sufficient to cure any alleged error (see, People v. Jacquin, 124 A.D.2d 594, 596, 507 N.Y.S.2d 736, affd. 71 N.Y.2d 825, 527 N.Y.S.2d 728, 522 N.E.2d 1026; People v. Rolchigo, 33 A.D.2d 1060, 307 N.Y.S.2d 412, affd. 28 N.Y.2d 644, 320 N.Y.S.2d 251, 269 N.E.2d 39; People v. Moore, 114 A.D.2d 595, 596, 494 N.Y.S.2d 440).
Finally, we reject defendant's contention concerning the severity of the sentence. The court imposed the minimum sentence authorized by statute (see, Penal Law § 70.06[6][a] ) and, “[c]onsequently, the sentence cannot be considered unduly harsh or [severe]” (People v. Ricciardi, 149 A.D.2d 742, 744, 540 N.Y.S.2d 526; see, People v. Jones, 95 A.D.2d 869, 870, 463 N.Y.S.2d 888).
Judgment unanimously affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: December 21, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)