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. Halina DZEBOLO, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Lange, J.), rendered August 13, 2004, convicting her of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was suppress physical evidence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5] ).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the warrantless search and seizure of certain items in her apartment did not violate her rights under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The police responded to the defendant's apartment in response to an emergency call for an ambulance and, upon their arrival, the defendant let the police into the apartment. While the police lawfully remained inside the apartment, they properly seized only those items, in plain view, which constituted evidence of a crime (see Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730, 741-742, 103 S.Ct. 1535, 75 L.Ed.2d 502; People v. George, 7 A.D.3d 810, 811, 776 N.Y.S.2d 883; People v. Dixon, 281 A.D.2d 430, 721 N.Y.S.2d 402; People v. Rielly, 190 A.D.2d 695, 695-696, 593 N.Y.S.2d 275; People v. Thebner, 168 A.D.2d 653, 654, 563 N.Y.S.2d 484; People v. Reilly, 155 A.D.2d 961, 962, 548 N.Y.S.2d 125).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 83, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).
The defendant's contention that she was deprived of a fair trial by certain statements made by the prosecutor during summation is without merit and the defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review.
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: May 16, 2006
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)