People v. Fridman
This text of 522 N.E.2d 1035 (People v. Fridman) 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.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
In the context of the conversation between the defendant and the police, the defendant’s suggestions that he or the police might want to consult with his attorney with respect to certain matters cannot be said to constitute an unequivocal assertion of the right to counsel. In addition, we note that the defendant was not in custody, was in his own office and continued the discussion with the police as if the suggestions had never been made.
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Dillon
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Designated pursuant to NY Constitution, article VI, § 2.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
522 N.E.2d 1035, 71 N.Y.2d 845, 527 N.Y.S.2d 737, 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fridman-ny-1988.