People v. Keller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Keller

185 A.D.2d 994

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 31, 1992·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the People from an order of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), dated September 24, 1991, which granted that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress statements made by him to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the order is affirmed.

Based upon our independent review of the testimony at the suppression hearing (see, e.g., People v Acosta, 74 AD2d 640), we conclude that the People failed to meet their burden of establishing beyond a reasonable doubt the voluntariness of the defendant’s statement (see, People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38; People v Feingold, 106 AD2d 583, 584). Harwood, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the People from an order of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), dated September 24, 1991, which granted that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress statements made by him to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the order is affirmed.

Based upon our independent review of the testimony at the suppression hearing (see, e.g., People v Acosta, 74 AD2d 640), we conclude that the People failed to meet their burden of establishing beyond a reasonable doubt the voluntariness of the defendant’s statement (see, People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38; People v Feingold, 106 AD2d 583, 584). Harwood, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.

People v. Keller, 185 A.D.2d 994 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

185 A.D.2d 994 (People v. Keller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related