People v. Price

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Price

108 A.D.2d 933, 485 N.Y.S.2d 826, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43269

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 25, 1985·Published

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), rendered September 19, 1983, convicting her of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing a sentence of IVs to 4 years’ imprisonment.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant contends that her confession, obtained 6V2 hours after her arrest, should have been suppressed. The record supports a conclusion that defendant was lawfully arrested and properly advised of her Miranda rights. She voluntarily agreed to make a statement without an attorney present. There was no indication that she was deprived of food, drink or sleep. Therefore, suppression of defendant’s statement was properly denied (cf. People v Casassa, 49 NY2d 668, cert denied 449 US 842; People v Crosby, 91 AD2d 20, lv denied 59 NY2d 765; People v Clow, 62 AD2d 880).

[934] The sentence imposed was in accordance with the bargained plea and the appellate modification is not warranted (cf. People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), rendered September 19, 1983, convicting her of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing a sentence of IVs to 4 years’ imprisonment.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant contends that her confession, obtained 6V2 hours after her arrest, should have been suppressed. The record supports a conclusion that defendant was lawfully arrested and properly advised of her Miranda rights. She voluntarily agreed to make a statement without an attorney present. There was no indication that she was deprived of food, drink or sleep. Therefore, suppression of defendant’s statement was properly denied (cf. People v Casassa, 49 NY2d 668, cert denied 449 US 842; People v Crosby, 91 AD2d 20, lv denied 59 NY2d 765; People v Clow, 62 AD2d 880).

[934] The sentence imposed was in accordance with the bargained plea and the appellate modification is not warranted (cf. People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

People v. Price, 108 A.D.2d 933, 485 N.Y.S.2d 826, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43269 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

108 A.D.2d 933 (People v. Price) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related