Jose Rivera, 53, was released after arraignment because the charge is not bail-eligible.
NEW YORK CITY, NY — A Brooklyn man has been charged with concealing a human corpse after a cleaning crew found his roommate’s decomposed remains on a couch inside their Crown Heights apartment last week, authorities and prosecutors said.
Jose Rivera, 53, was taken into custody the day after the discovery at 1722 Union St., where he and the dead man lived through a supportive housing program run by the Institute for Community Living. The case has drawn scrutiny because workers found the remains only after entering the apartment to clean it, and because the medical examiner has not yet determined how the man died.
Cleaning crews arrived at the Union Street apartment just before 8 a.m. Thursday, according to prosecutors and police sources cited in local reports. Rivera initially refused to let them inside, court documents say. Once the cleaning began, workers found the man’s remains on a couch, buried beneath clothing and debris. Police were called to the apartment, and paramedics later pronounced the man dead at the scene. A person who knew both men said they had lived together for nearly three years and argued at times about the condition of the apartment. The man said Rivera’s roommate was “never a people-person” and had struggled with mental health issues.
Police have not released the dead man’s name. The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner has not determined a cause of death because of the state of decomposition, according to officials cited in the case. It also was not immediately clear how long the body had been in the apartment before cleaners arrived. Police sources said a social worker had reported a “foul smell” on June 29, several days before the remains were found. The apartment is in Crown Heights, near Union Street and Utica Avenue. Early reports described the remains as heavily decomposed and found in or around a sofa, with investigators still working to determine whether the death involved a crime beyond the alleged concealment.
The apartment was part of a supportive housing arrangement through the Institute for Community Living, a New York nonprofit that serves people with mental health needs and other challenges. The organization said it was aware of the incident and was cooperating with law enforcement. “We cannot comment on the details of any individual’s circumstances, housing placement, or services, as we are required to protect the privacy of the people we support,” a spokesperson said. The statement did not identify either resident or describe what services they received. Authorities have not said whether any staff member entered the apartment between the June 29 odor report and the July 2 discovery.
Rivera was arraigned Sunday on a charge of concealment of a human corpse. Prosecutors said the charge is not bail-eligible under state law, and Rivera was released after the court appearance. He is due back in court on Oct. 13. No homicide charge had been filed as of Tuesday evening, and officials had not announced a final ruling on the manner or cause of death. Investigators are expected to rely on the medical examiner’s findings, apartment records, witness statements and any available housing program notes as they work to establish the timeline inside the apartment.
The discovery left people familiar with the building asking how a body could remain hidden inside a shared apartment. The man who knew both residents told local reporters that the two men’s living conditions had been a source of tension. Authorities have not said whether the dead man had been reported missing or whether relatives had been notified. Police also have not said what Rivera told investigators, if anything, about the body or the condition of the apartment. The case remains focused on the alleged concealment while officials wait for forensic answers that could determine whether additional charges are possible.
Rivera remains out of custody while the death investigation continues. The next known court date is Oct. 13, and the medical examiner’s ruling remains the key unresolved finding in the case.
Author note: Last updated July 8, 2026.