People v. Santos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Santos

3 A.D.3d 317, 770 N.Y.S.2d 314

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

DecidedJanuary 6, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 3 A.D.3d 317 (People v. Santos) 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. Santos, 3 A.D.3d 317, 770 N.Y.S.2d 314 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert Cohen, J.), rendered January 7, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 20 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress his videotaped statement since it was sufficiently attenuated from the taint of a warrantless arrest made in violation of Payton v New York (445 US 573 [1980]). The videotaped statement to an assistant district attorney was taken about six hours after the arrest and was made after Miranda warnings and waivers. There was also a substantial break of more than three hours between an earlier statement to a detective, which the court suppressed, and the videotaped statement, which was conducted by a different interrogator (see People v Chen Ren Jie, 280 AD2d 301 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 798 [2001]). The record also supports the court’s finding that the Payton violation was not flagrant.

The court properly denied defendant’s request for a missing witness charge as to the detective who took defendant’s initial written statement, which had been suppressed but which was nevertheless elicited by defendant at trial as a tactical device. The court correctly concluded that the witness could not provide [318]*318any noncumulative testimony (see People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424 [1986]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Williams and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert Cohen, J.), rendered January 7, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 20 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress his videotaped statement since it was sufficiently attenuated from the taint of a warrantless arrest made in violation of Payton v New York (445 US 573 [1980]). The videotaped statement to an assistant district attorney was taken about six hours after the arrest and was made after Miranda warnings and waivers. There was also a substantial break of more than three hours between an earlier statement to a detective, which the court suppressed, and the videotaped statement, which was conducted by a different interrogator (see People v Chen Ren Jie, 280 AD2d 301 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 798 [2001]). The record also supports the court’s finding that the Payton violation was not flagrant.

The court properly denied defendant’s request for a missing witness charge as to the detective who took defendant’s initial written statement, which had been suppressed but which was nevertheless elicited by defendant at trial as a tactical device. The court correctly concluded that the witness could not provide [318]*318any noncumulative testimony (see People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424 [1986]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Williams and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.3d 317, 770 N.Y.S.2d 314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-santos-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack