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.
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Edwin NASARIO, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Koch, J.), rendered March 4, 1996, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (George, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress statements made by him to law enforcement officials.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing record demonstrates that the police entered the defendant's apartment and arrested him only after obtaining the permission of the defendant's mother, an individual who clearly possessed the authority to consent to their entry (see, People v. Adams, 53 N.Y.2d 1, 439 N.Y.S.2d 877, 422 N.E.2d 537, cert. denied 454 U.S. 854, 102 S.Ct. 301, 70 L.Ed.2d 148; People v. Huff, 200 A.D.2d 761, 607 N.Y.S.2d 96; People v. Venable, 192 A.D.2d 565, 596 N.Y.S.2d 727). The ruse employed by the police in acquiring the mother's consent was not so fundamentally unfair as to constitute a denial of due process (see, People v. Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1, 11, 427 N.Y.S.2d 944, 405 N.E.2d 188; People v. Rosario, 186 A.D.2d 598, 588 N.Y.S.2d 393; People v. Abrams, 95 A.D.2d 155, 157, 465 N.Y.S.2d 208).
In addition, the court did not err in denying the defendant's request for a missing witness charge where the defendant failed to establish that the missing witness would have offered anything other than cumulative testimony if produced at trial or that the witness was under the control of the People (see, People v. Macana, 84 N.Y.2d 173, 177, 615 N.Y.S.2d 656, 639 N.E.2d 13; People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424, 509 N.Y.S.2d 796, 502 N.E.2d 583; People v. Pierre, 149 A.D.2d 740, 540 N.Y.S.2d 524). In fact, the record reveals that the missing witness, a friend of the complainant, was also a friend of the defendant who may have been equally available to the defense and the prosecution (see, People v. Rose, 126 A.D.2d 581, 510 N.Y.S.2d 701).
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: February 16, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)