People v. Evans

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Evans

36 A.D.3d 830, 826 N.Y.S.2d 916

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

DecidedJanuary 23, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 36 A.D.3d 830 (People v. Evans) 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. Evans, 36 A.D.3d 830, 826 N.Y.S.2d 916 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Buchter, J.), rendered April 14, 2004, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Demakos, J.H.O.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to a law enforcement official.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the hearing court properly found that the statements he made to the police while he was in a holding cell were voluntary and spontaneous, and accordingly, admissible at trial (see People v Rivers, 56 NY2d 476, 479 [1982]; People v Farrell, 13 AD3d 644, 645 [2004]; People v Davis, 261 AD2d 411, 412 [1999]). Spolzino, J.P., Florio, Lifson and Covello, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Buchter, J.), rendered April 14, 2004, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Demakos, J.H.O.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to a law enforcement official.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the hearing court properly found that the statements he made to the police while he was in a holding cell were voluntary and spontaneous, and accordingly, admissible at trial (see People v Rivers, 56 NY2d 476, 479 [1982]; People v Farrell, 13 AD3d 644, 645 [2004]; People v Davis, 261 AD2d 411, 412 [1999]). Spolzino, J.P., Florio, Lifson and Covello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 A.D.3d 830, 826 N.Y.S.2d 916, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-evans-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack