| People v Brewster |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 01557 [48 AD3d 696] |
| February 19, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Hewlett Brewster, Appellant. |
—[*1] Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Robert A. Schwartz of counsel; JasonR. Richards on the brief), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Honorof, J.),rendered April 1, 2005, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, andimposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, pursuant to astipulation in lieu of motions, of the suppression of physical evidence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
There is no basis to disturb the hearing court's finding that the defendant voluntarilyconsented to give the police saliva and blood samples (see People v Hay, 37 AD3d 494 [2007]). Accordingly, suppressionwas properly denied.
Upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfiedthat the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633[2006]).
The defendant has failed to demonstrate that he was denied the effective assistance ofcounsel (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708 [1998]; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d137 [1981]). The arguments and objections which the defendant claims should have beenasserted had little or no chance of success, and a review of the record in its entirety reveals thatdefense counsel provided meaningful representation (see People v Caban, 5 NY3d 143 [2005]; People v Stultz, 2 NY3d 277[2004]; People v Benevento, [*2]91 NY2d 708 [1998]).
The court providently exercised its discretion in imposing the maximum sentence (seePeople v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Prudenti, P.J., Lifson, Covello and Balkin, JJ., concur.