People v. Kirkley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kirkley

135 A.D.2d 571, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53435

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

DecidedDecember 7, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 135 A.D.2d 571 (People v. Kirkley) 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. Kirkley, 135 A.D.2d 571, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53435 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lakritz, J.), rendered June 3, 1986, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress statements given by him to law enforcement authorities.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record supports the hearing court’s determination that he was not in custody until after probable cause for his arrest on a charge of murder had been established (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759; People v Yukl, 25 NY2d 585, 589, cert denied 400 US 851).

No objections were registered to the prosecutor’s summation remarks which the defendant now contends were inflammatory and prejudicial. Thus, the issue is not preserved for appellate review, and, under the circumstances of this case, does not warrant consideration under our interest of justice jurisdiction. Rubin, J. P., Kooper, Sullivan and Harwood, 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 (Lakritz, J.), rendered June 3, 1986, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress statements given by him to law enforcement authorities.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record supports the hearing court’s determination that he was not in custody until after probable cause for his arrest on a charge of murder had been established (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759; People v Yukl, 25 NY2d 585, 589, cert denied 400 US 851).

No objections were registered to the prosecutor’s summation remarks which the defendant now contends were inflammatory and prejudicial. Thus, the issue is not preserved for appellate review, and, under the circumstances of this case, does not warrant consideration under our interest of justice jurisdiction. Rubin, J. P., Kooper, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 A.D.2d 571, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kirkley-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack