People v. Witherspoon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Witherspoon

105 A.D.2d 1066, 482 N.Y.S.2d 632, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21145

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 7, 1984·Published

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s statements were voluntary and not, as defendant asserts, improperly induced by misleading police comments (People v Tarsia, 50 NY2d 1; People v Yerdon, 51 AD2d 875; People v Rittenhouse, 37 AD2d 866). Additionally, since defendant failed to raise a factual issue regarding a violation of his Miranda rights by the arresting officers, there was no burden on the People to produce those officers at the suppression hearing (cf. People v McGregor, 84 AD2d 610). (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Mark, J. — burglary, third degree, and other charges.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and O’Donnell, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s statements were voluntary and not, as defendant asserts, improperly induced by misleading police comments (People v Tarsia, 50 NY2d 1; People v Yerdon, 51 AD2d 875; People v Rittenhouse, 37 AD2d 866). Additionally, since defendant failed to raise a factual issue regarding a violation of his Miranda rights by the arresting officers, there was no burden on the People to produce those officers at the suppression hearing (cf. People v McGregor, 84 AD2d 610). (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Mark, J. — burglary, third degree, and other charges.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and O’Donnell, JJ.

People v. Witherspoon, 105 A.D.2d 1066, 482 N.Y.S.2d 632, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21145 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

105 A.D.2d 1066 (People v. Witherspoon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related