People v. Charleston
This text of 425 N.E.2d 881 (People v. Charleston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
True it is, as defendant contends, that deprivation of counsel issues need not be preserved (People v Carmine A., 53 NY2d 816; People v Samuels, 49 NY2d 218, 221; People v Ermo, 47 NY2d 863). However, in this case that question is academic. Defendant pleaded guilty in County Court before the trial commenced without having made a motion to suppress the statements which he now contends were elicited in violation of his right to counsel. Since there is, therefore, neither a trial nor a suppression record, nor, for that matter, any factual record on this subject, appellate review is precluded (People v De Mauro, 48 NY2d 892, 893).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
425 N.E.2d 881, 54 N.Y.2d 622, 442 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2588, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-charleston-ny-1981.