People v. Robinson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Robinson

28 A.D.2d 816, 281 N.Y.S.2d 956, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3690

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

DecidedJune 29, 1967

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 28 A.D.2d 816 (People v. Robinson) 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. Robinson, 28 A.D.2d 816, 281 N.Y.S.2d 956, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3690 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

[817]*817Memorandum: Evidence presented on the voir dire examination as to the circumstances surrounding the taking of the statements from the defendant which were received on the trial requires a finding by the court not only as to voluntariness but also independently as to whether the defendant incriminated himself while being interrogated by the police in the absence of counsel after he had requested the aid of an attorney. (See Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368; People v. Goodman, 27 A D 2d 692; People v. Neureuter, 26 A D 2d 899; People v. Spears, 26 A D 2d 893; People v. Michalski, 26 A D 2d 766.) The People and defendant should be permitted to put in additional proof on those issues if either side so desires. (People v. Huntley, 15 N Y 2d 72.) (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court convicting defendant of murder, first degree.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Del Vecehio and Marsh, JJ.

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

[817]*817Memorandum: Evidence presented on the voir dire examination as to the circumstances surrounding the taking of the statements from the defendant which were received on the trial requires a finding by the court not only as to voluntariness but also independently as to whether the defendant incriminated himself while being interrogated by the police in the absence of counsel after he had requested the aid of an attorney. (See Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368; People v. Goodman, 27 A D 2d 692; People v. Neureuter, 26 A D 2d 899; People v. Spears, 26 A D 2d 893; People v. Michalski, 26 A D 2d 766.) The People and defendant should be permitted to put in additional proof on those issues if either side so desires. (People v. Huntley, 15 N Y 2d 72.) (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court convicting defendant of murder, first degree.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Del Vecehio and Marsh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.2d 816, 281 N.Y.S.2d 956, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-robinson-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack