People v. Williams
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant’s claim that his statements should have been suppressed based upon the delay in his arraignment is without merit. An unnecessary delay in an arraignment, without more, does not cause the accused’s right to counsel to attach automatically, and such a delay is only one factor to consider in assessing the voluntariness of a confession (see People v Beale, 283 AD2d 653; People v White, 259 AD2d 508; see generally People v Hopkins, 58 NY2d 1079). To suppress a statement on this ground, there must be evidence that the delay was for the purpose of depriving the defendant of his right…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. HopkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. FaisonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- People v. JacksonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- People v. WhiteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- People v. BealeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- People v. BondsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. SolorzanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. NobleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- People v. BryanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.