People v. Taylor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Taylor

34 A.D.2d 530, 309 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5299

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

DecidedMarch 19, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 34 A.D.2d 530 (People v. Taylor) 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. Taylor, 34 A.D.2d 530, 309 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5299 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered on January 23,1969, granting defendants’ motion for the suppression of incriminating statements, unanimously reversed on the law, and the motion denied. The fact that defendant was arraigned on one charge and assigned counsel did not interdict law enforcement officials from interrogating defendant, even in the absence of assigned counsel, concerning a different and unrelated crime—upon which he has been neither arraigned nor indicted — committed many weeks before, and after proper Miranda warnings were given. Nor does such interrogation render inadmissible a confession or any other inculpatory statement obtained as a result of such questioning. Such procedure is sanctioned by People v. Stanley (15 NY 2d 30). And we construe the later ease of People v. Simons (22 N Y 2d 533) to be in complete accord with this view. Concur — Capozzoli, J. P., McGivern, McNally, Steuer and Tilzer, JJ.

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

Order entered on January 23,1969, granting defendants’ motion for the suppression of incriminating statements, unanimously reversed on the law, and the motion denied. The fact that defendant was arraigned on one charge and assigned counsel did not interdict law enforcement officials from interrogating defendant, even in the absence of assigned counsel, concerning a different and unrelated crime—upon which he has been neither arraigned nor indicted — committed many weeks before, and after proper Miranda warnings were given. Nor does such interrogation render inadmissible a confession or any other inculpatory statement obtained as a result of such questioning. Such procedure is sanctioned by People v. Stanley (15 NY 2d 30). And we construe the later ease of People v. Simons (22 N Y 2d 533) to be in complete accord with this view. Concur — Capozzoli, J. P., McGivern, McNally, Steuer and Tilzer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.2d 530, 309 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-taylor-nyappdiv-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack