People v. Grice

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Grice

293 A.D.2d 756, 741 N.Y.S.2d 440, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4110

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

DecidedApril 29, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 293 A.D.2d 756 (People v. Grice) 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. Grice, 293 A.D.2d 756, 741 N.Y.S.2d 440, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4110 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Katz, J.), rendered January 6, 1999, convicting him of burglary in the first degree (two counts), burglary in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second [757]*757degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Latella, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress two written statements that he made to the police. The hearing court correctly found that the defendant’s right to counsel had not attached before he made the statements and that the statements were voluntary (see generally, People v Pulliam, 292 AD2d 399; People v Lennon, 243 AD2d 495; People v Cameron, 167 Misc 2d 61, 68-69; cf. People v Garofolo, 46 NY2d 592; People v Pinzon, 44 NY2d 458). The hearing court’s finding should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see People v Davis, 221 AD2d 358; People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). As the record supports the hearing court’s determination, we agree that there was no basis for suppressing the statements. Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, Goldstein and Cozier, 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 (Katz, J.), rendered January 6, 1999, convicting him of burglary in the first degree (two counts), burglary in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second [757]*757degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Latella, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress two written statements that he made to the police. The hearing court correctly found that the defendant’s right to counsel had not attached before he made the statements and that the statements were voluntary (see generally, People v Pulliam, 292 AD2d 399; People v Lennon, 243 AD2d 495; People v Cameron, 167 Misc 2d 61, 68-69; cf. People v Garofolo, 46 NY2d 592; People v Pinzon, 44 NY2d 458). The hearing court’s finding should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see People v Davis, 221 AD2d 358; People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). As the record supports the hearing court’s determination, we agree that there was no basis for suppressing the statements. Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, Goldstein and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 A.D.2d 756, 741 N.Y.S.2d 440, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-grice-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack