People v. Borg
This text of 110 A.D.2d 844 (People v. Borg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The hearing court properly determined that defendant and his wife had voluntarily consented to the searches (see, People v Gonzalez, 39 NY2d 122) and that defendant’s statement to Investigator McKnight after defendant had invoked his right to counsel was admissible as a spontaneous statement (see, People v Rogers, 48 NY2d 167). We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find them to be lacking in merit. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Thompson and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
110 A.D.2d 844, 488 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-borg-nyappdiv-1985.