| People v Mirabal |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 09870 [57 AD3d 1170] |
| December 18, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Argelis R. Mirabal,Appellant. |
—[*1] Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Joann Rose Parry of counsel), forrespondent.
Kavanagh, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Daley, J.),rendered September 26, 2007, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminalpossession of a weapon in the third degree.
On the morning of June 30, 2006, following a robbery and near fatal shooting the night before, thePolice Department in Scranton, Pennsylvania advised the Binghamton Police Department that thesuspected shooter was believed to be in the City of Binghamton, Broome County. After learning thatthe suspect went by the name of "Angel," a detective in Binghamton located a photograph of defendant,who was then identified by one of his accomplices. The police in Scranton obtained an arrest warrantand, on the evening of June 30, defendant was arrested by Sergeant Christopher Bracco of theBinghamton Police Department. Bracco, who was familiar with defendant and had seen him sittingoutside of a particular residence earlier that day, returned to the residence and, upon seeing defendantstanding inside, knocked on the front door and requested that he step outside to discuss a purportednoise complaint. Defendant was then arrested in the front yard, at which time he stated that he had agun in his pocket. After County Court denied defendant's request to suppress both his statement andthe gun at the suppression hearing, defendant pleaded guilty to one count of criminal possession of aweapon in the third degree and was sentenced as a second felony offender to 3½ to 7 years inprison. Defendant now appeals, contending that County Court erred in denying his suppression motion.[*2]
We affirm. Determining whether a statement is voluntary is afactual issue dependent upon the relevant surrounding circumstances (see People v Davis, 18 AD3d 1016,1017 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 805 [2005]; People v Meissler, 305 AD2d 724, 725[2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 644 [2003]), and "[t]he credibility assessments of thesuppression court in making that determination are entitled deference" (People v Davis, 18AD3d at 1017; see People v Meissler, 305 AD2d at 725). Here, Bracco testified that, afterdefendant stepped outside, he and another officer "put [their] hands on him to detain him, at which timehe said he had a gun on him." This testimony was corroborated by Officer Anthony Diles, who was alsopresent during the arrest. Although defendant and his friend Raymond Delgado, who witnessed thearrest, both testified to the contrary, indicating that the gun was found after defendant was handcuffedby Bracco and asked whether he had any weapons on him, County Court found Bracco and Diles tobe more credible and we discern no reason to disturb this finding. The officers' testimony supports thedetermination that defendant's statement was voluntary and, consequently, County Court did not err indenying defendant's suppression motion.
Cardona, P.J., Spain, Rose and Stein, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.