PEOPLE v. WILLIAMS (2006)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered December 18, 2002, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), robbery in the first degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, his motion pursuant to CPL 330.30(1) in which he claims a violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 was properly denied by the trial court (see People v. Brown, 67 N.Y.2d 555, 559, 505 N.Y.S.2d 574, 496 N.E.2d 663;  People v. Bailey, 275 A.D.2d 663, 713 N.Y.S.2d 535).   To the extent the defendant's claim is based on a post-verdict investigation, it is dehors the record and therefore is not reviewable on direct appeal (see People v. Spirles, 294 A.D.2d 810, 742 N.Y.S.2d 457;  People v. Bailey, supra ).

We reject the defendant's contention that there was insufficient evidence to corroborate the testimony of an accomplice (see CPL 60.22).  “[T]he testimony from the accomplice witness was sufficiently corroborated by evidence from ․ independent source[s] tending to connect the defendant with the crime in such a way that the jury may be reasonably satisfied that the accomplice [was] telling the truth” (People v. Nylander, 21 A.D.3d 500, 501, 799 N.Y.S.2d 811 [citations and internal quotation marks omitted];  see People v. Daniels, 37 N.Y.2d 624, 629-630, 376 N.Y.S.2d 436, 339 N.E.2d 139).