Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel based upon the failure of defense counsel to request a hearing to determine whether his statement to the police should have been suppressed as the product of an illegal arrest. Defendant has failed to show that a motion to suppress on that ground, “if made, would have been successful and that counsel otherwise failed to provide meaningful representation” (People v Willis, 261 AD2d 946, lv denied 93 NY2d 1029). The police were dispatched at 2:30 a.m. to investigate an alarm at a clothing store, where they observed defendant exit through a door that had obviously been pried open. The police properly asked defendant his name (see generally, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210, 223), and defendant made a statement in response to that inquiry. Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress the statement as involuntarily made (see, People v Wiesmore, 204 AD2d 1003, 1003-1004, lv denied 84 NY2d 873), and defendant has failed to show that the court would have suppressed his statement if defense counsel had sought a probable cause hearing. Upon our review of the record, we conclude that defendant was provided meaningful representation (see, People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712-713). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Cornelius, J. — Burglary, 3rd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Hayes, Scudder and Burns, JJ.
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Vernon Carter, Appellant
281 A.D.2d 919721 N.Y.S.2d 849
Authorities cited
No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.