| People v Lopez |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 06574 [65 AD3d 1166] |
| September 15, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Ollman Lopez, Appellant. |
—[*1] Daniel M. Donovan, Jr., District Attorney, Staten Island, N.Y. (Morrie I. Kleinbart ofcounsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County(Rooney, J.), rendered February 13, 2007, convicting him of murder in the second degree (twocounts, one count each of intentional murder and felony murder), attempted robbery in the firstdegree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, andimposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch ofthe defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress certain statements he made to lawenforcement officials.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
A detective investigating the shooting homicide of an employee of a delicatessen on StatenIsland learned that the defendant might have been involved in the shooting. The detective alsolearned that the defendant was being held in custody in Pennsylvania on an unrelated drugcharge. He thus spoke to the arresting detective in that case. No attorney cautioned the NewYork detective not to speak with the defendant, and no Pennsylvania official informed him thatthe defendant was represented by counsel. The detective met with the defendant in thePennsylvania correctional facility, and read him his Miranda rights (see Miranda vArizona, 384 US 436 [1966]), which the defendant waived.
The Supreme Court correctly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion whichwas to suppress his statements to the New York detective. Although the defendant wasrepresented by counsel in connection with the charge for which he was in custody inPennsylvania, his right to counsel was not implicated because the New York detective whoquestioned him was not aware of this fact (see People v Orlando, 61 AD3d 1001 [2009]; People vWilliams, 303 AD2d 608, 609 [2003]; People v Jackson, 292 AD2d 466 [2002]).
The defendant's contention, raised in his supplemental pro se brief, is unpreserved forappellate review and, in any event, is without merit. Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Florio and Lott, JJ.,concur.