People v. Browne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Browne

106 A.D.2d 510, 483 N.Y.S.2d 44, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21547

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 17, 1984·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), rendered April 14, 1983, convicting him of manslaughter in [511]*511the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant’s guilt was established by direct as well as circumstantial evidence that was sufficient to eliminate all innocent hypotheses (People v Kennedy, 47 NY2d 196, 202). The evidence included a statement defendant made to a detective on the telephone, essentially admitting that he stabbed the victim. A proper foundation was laid for introduction of this statement, upon which the jury could conclude that defendant was the speaker (People v Lynes, 49 NY2d 286, 291-292). Defendant was not in custody and, in any event, volunteered the inculpatory statement; hence no Miranda warnings were required (Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436, 478; People v Rodney P., 21 NY2d 1).

We have examined defendant’s other contentions and have found them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Thompson and Bracken, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), rendered April 14, 1983, convicting him of manslaughter in [511]*511the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant’s guilt was established by direct as well as circumstantial evidence that was sufficient to eliminate all innocent hypotheses (People v Kennedy, 47 NY2d 196, 202). The evidence included a statement defendant made to a detective on the telephone, essentially admitting that he stabbed the victim. A proper foundation was laid for introduction of this statement, upon which the jury could conclude that defendant was the speaker (People v Lynes, 49 NY2d 286, 291-292). Defendant was not in custody and, in any event, volunteered the inculpatory statement; hence no Miranda warnings were required (Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436, 478; People v Rodney P., 21 NY2d 1).

We have examined defendant’s other contentions and have found them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Thompson and Bracken, JJ., concur.

People v. Browne, 106 A.D.2d 510, 483 N.Y.S.2d 44, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21547 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

106 A.D.2d 510 (People v. Browne) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related