People v Jeffries
2009 NY Slip Op 03936 [62 AD3d 530]
May 19, 2009
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, July 1, 2009


The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Andre Jeffries, Appellant.

[*1]Estelle Jana Roond, Brooklyn, for appellant.

Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Andrew S. Holland of counsel), forrespondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Troy K. Webber, J., on suppression and speedytrial motions; Martin Marcus, J., at plea and sentence), rendered March 15, 2005, convictingdefendant of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a persistent violent felonyoffender, to a term of 14 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

By pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his statutory speedy trial claim (see People vO'Brien, 56 NY2d 1009 [1982]). Defendant's constitutional speedy trial claim is improperlyraised for the first time in his reply brief (see People v Napolitano, 282 AD2d 49, 53[2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 866 [2001]) Furthermore, since defendant's speedy trialmotion was based entirely on grounds set forth in CPL 30.30 and did not raise a constitutionalissue, his constitutional claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice.As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits (see People v Taranovich, 37NY2d 442 [1975]).

The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress a showup identification made atthe scene of the crime. While the transcript of the hearing is apparently lost, we conclude, basedon the hearing court's detailed findings, that the showup was not unduly suggestive. Defendant'ssole argument is that the arresting officer "whispered" something to the victim prior to theidentification. However, the hearing court's findings indicated that the officer merely asked thevictim whether she could identify the person who assaulted her.

Defendant's procedural challenges to his persistent violent felony offender adjudication[*2]are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interestof justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject them on the merits. Concur—Andrias,J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Nardelli and Freedman, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.