Legal Opinion
People v. Tankleff
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 22, 1994PublishedCited by 117 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
There is support in the record for the undisturbed finding of the trial court that defendant was not in custody and thus was not entitled to Miranda warnings at any point before he indicated his desire to tell the police what really had happened on the morning his parents were bludgeoned and stabbed to death. Similarly, the record supports the undisturbed finding that defendant’s statements were voluntarily given and that his will had not been overborne by any actions taken by the police. We cannot say as a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- People v. GonzalezNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- People v. TarsiaNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- People v. WilliamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. HarrisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. De JesusNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by117 opinions
- Martin H. Tankleff v. D.A. Senkowski, Superintendent of Clinton Correctional FacilityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- People v. TankleffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. EllisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- People v. TownsleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- People v. LaGuerreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
112 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.