People v. Chambliss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Chambliss

110 A.D.2d 707, 488 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48603

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 8, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 110 A.D.2d 707 (People v. Chambliss) 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.

Bluebook

People v. Chambliss, 110 A.D.2d 707, 488 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48603 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Based upon the record at bar, we find that defendant’s statement to the police the morning after his arrest was made after he knowingly and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights. There was no evidence that the delay between defendant’s arrest and his arraignment was unwarranted. Moreover, such factor is but one of several bearing upon the question of voluntariness of an inculpatory statement (People v Dairsaw, 46 NY2d 739, cert denied 440 US 985). Further, the court gave a lengthy and thorough instruction to the jury regarding this issue (cf. People v Lovello, 1 NY2d 436; People v Vann, 54 AD2d 356).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them also to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

Based upon the record at bar, we find that defendant’s statement to the police the morning after his arrest was made after he knowingly and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights. There was no evidence that the delay between defendant’s arrest and his arraignment was unwarranted. Moreover, such factor is but one of several bearing upon the question of voluntariness of an inculpatory statement (People v Dairsaw, 46 NY2d 739, cert denied 440 US 985). Further, the court gave a lengthy and thorough instruction to the jury regarding this issue (cf. People v Lovello, 1 NY2d 436; People v Vann, 54 AD2d 356).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them also to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 A.D.2d 707, 488 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48603, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chambliss-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack