People v. Watson

152 A.D.2d 955, 544 N.Y.S.2d 755, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9839
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Watson. Read the opinion of the Court — 162 A.D.2d 1015

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant asserts that his statement to the police should have been suppressed because it was induced by a promise by the police that he would not be prosecuted if he returned the stolen property. We disagree. The police officer who questioned defendant denied making such promise and the suppression court found that no promises were made. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Wisner, J. — grand larceny, second degree.) Present— Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

People v. Watson, 152 A.D.2d 955, 544 N.Y.S.2d 755, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9839 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

152 A.D.2d 955 (People v. Watson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.