Home/New York Court of Appeals/People v. Prince

People v. Prince

408 N.E.2d 672, 50 N.Y.2d 883, 430 N.Y.S.2d 264, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2442
New York Court of Appeals·Decided June 5, 1980·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, defendant’s statement to Assistant District Attorney Friedman suppressed and a new trial ordered.

It being undisputed that defendant’s second statement was made in custody after he had requested the assistance of counsel, suppression of that statement is required (People v Cunningham, 49 NY2d 203). In the circumstances here presented, reception of that tainted statement into evidence cannot be deemed harmless error (see People v Garofolo, 46 [885]*885NY2d 592). We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.

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

People v. Prince, 408 N.E.2d 672, 50 N.Y.2d 883, 430 N.Y.S.2d 264, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2442 (N.Y. 1980).

408 N.E.2d 672 (People v. Prince) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Gamble
129 A.D.2d 470 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
People v. Bertolo
102 A.D.2d 193 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
People v. Coles
89 A.D.2d 471 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
People v. Schaeffer
438 N.E.2d 94 (New York Court of Appeals, 1982)
People v. Pepper
423 N.E.2d 366 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
People v. Jones
108 Misc. 2d 885 (New York Supreme Court, 1981)
People v. MacKenzie
78 A.D.2d 892 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)
People v. Gordon
77 A.D.2d 659 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)