People v Ralph Salierno

People v Salierno 2006 NY Slip Op 04869 [30 AD3d 546] Decided on June 13, 2006 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on June 13, 2006
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STEPHEN G. CRANE, J.P.
DAVID S. RITTER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.
2004-04291 DECISION & ORDER

[*1]The People, etc., respondent,

v

Ralph Salierno, appellant. (Ind. No. 636/03)




Matthew Muraskin, Huntington, N.Y., for appellant.
Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Michael
J. Miller of counsel; Kathleen Collins
on the brief), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Ohlig, J.), rendered April 26, 2004, convicting him of murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, and conspiracy in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the County Court erred in denying suppression of his confession is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit (see People v Rifkin, 289 AD2d 262; People v Morgan, 277 AD2d 331; People v Allen, 147 AD2d 968).

The defendant's contention in point two of his brief, regarding the sentence imposed, is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. The contention raised in point three of his brief, regarding his absence from a hearing held in chambers and the County Court's ruling regarding the alleged bias of a juror is without merit. The contentions raised in points four and five of his brief, regarding a tape-recorded statement, alleged bolstering, and the prosecutor's summation, are unpreserved for appellate review and in any event, are either without merit or do not require reversal. [*2]
CRANE, J.P., RITTER, KRAUSMAN and SKELOS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court