People v. HardisonPeople v. Hardison
In view of the court’s thorough instructions on the People’s burden of proof, there is no reasonable possibility that the jury could have construed the challenged portion of the People’s summation as shifting that burden to the defense (see People v Planca,
Since defendant did not move to suppress his DNA sample, CPL 710.70 (3) forecloses review of his claim that it was obtained by means of an unlawful search and seizure. In any event, defendant’s argument is unavailing (see Executive Law § 995 et seq.; Kellogg v Travis,
The court properly imposed consecutive sentences for the rape and sodomy, which were separate and discrete acts (People v Williams,