People v. Mankowitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mankowitz

208 A.D.2d 652, 618 N.Y.S.2d 228

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

DecidedOctober 11, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 208 A.D.2d 652 (People v. Mankowitz) 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. Mankowitz, 208 A.D.2d 652, 618 N.Y.S.2d 228 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from three judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O’Dwyer, J.), all rendered May 9, 1989, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 8329/87, robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 8478/87, and robbery in the first degree (three counts) under Indictment No. 575/89, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals under Indictment Nos. 8329/87 and 8478/87 bring up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress a statement made by him to an alleged agent of the police.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The hearing evidence demonstrates that while in the hospital, the defendant, within earshot of two detectives, voluntarily made an inculpatory statement to a friend, who was visiting him. The record supports the suppression court’s finding that the defendant’s friend was not acting either at the direction of, or in cooperation with, the police when he initiated a conversation with the defendant and elicited the defendant’s inculpatory response. Accordingly, the suppression court correctly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statement (see, People v Miller, 137 AD2d 626, 628-629; People v King, 155 AD2d 480; People v Sobolof, 109 AD2d 903, 904-905; People v Kelly, 170 AD2d 537). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from three judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O’Dwyer, J.), all rendered May 9, 1989, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 8329/87, robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 8478/87, and robbery in the first degree (three counts) under Indictment No. 575/89, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals under Indictment Nos. 8329/87 and 8478/87 bring up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress a statement made by him to an alleged agent of the police.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The hearing evidence demonstrates that while in the hospital, the defendant, within earshot of two detectives, voluntarily made an inculpatory statement to a friend, who was visiting him. The record supports the suppression court’s finding that the defendant’s friend was not acting either at the direction of, or in cooperation with, the police when he initiated a conversation with the defendant and elicited the defendant’s inculpatory response. Accordingly, the suppression court correctly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statement (see, People v Miller, 137 AD2d 626, 628-629; People v King, 155 AD2d 480; People v Sobolof, 109 AD2d 903, 904-905; People v Kelly, 170 AD2d 537). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 A.D.2d 652, 618 N.Y.S.2d 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mankowitz-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack