People v. Griffin

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Griffin

208 N.E.2d 179, 16 N.Y.2d 508, 260 N.Y.S.2d 447, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1415

DecidedApril 22, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 208 N.E.2d 179 (People v. Griffin) 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.

Bluebook

People v. Griffin, 208 N.E.2d 179, 16 N.Y.2d 508, 260 N.Y.S.2d 447, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1415 (N.Y. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

[509]*509Memorandum : We hold that nothing in Jackson v. Denno (378 U. S. 368) or People v. Huntley (15 N Y 2d 72) requires this court to overrule our decision in People v. Nicholson (11 N Y 2d 1067) whose holding and reasoning we now approve. (See People v. Rogers, 15 N Y 2d 690.) The defendant, therefore, is not now entitled to a hearing before the trial court on the issue of the voluntariness of his confession. Nor has any argument been advanced to justify or warrant any change or modification of our conclusion, in People v. Howard (12 N Y 2d 65, 68-69), that retroactive effect is not to be accorded to decisions of this court respecting right to counsel. (See, also, People v. Rogers, 15 N Y 2d 690, supra.)

The order appealed from should be affirmed.

Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan concur.

Order affirmed.

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

[509]*509Memorandum : We hold that nothing in Jackson v. Denno (378 U. S. 368) or People v. Huntley (15 N Y 2d 72) requires this court to overrule our decision in People v. Nicholson (11 N Y 2d 1067) whose holding and reasoning we now approve. (See People v. Rogers, 15 N Y 2d 690.) The defendant, therefore, is not now entitled to a hearing before the trial court on the issue of the voluntariness of his confession. Nor has any argument been advanced to justify or warrant any change or modification of our conclusion, in People v. Howard (12 N Y 2d 65, 68-69), that retroactive effect is not to be accorded to decisions of this court respecting right to counsel. (See, also, People v. Rogers, 15 N Y 2d 690, supra.)

The order appealed from should be affirmed.

Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan concur.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 N.E.2d 179, 16 N.Y.2d 508, 260 N.Y.S.2d 447, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-griffin-ny-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack