People v. Eismann
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*538We find no reason to disturb the hearing court’s findings that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his Miranda rights (see, Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436) and voluntarily confessed to the crime. In so finding, the hearing court specifically rejected the testimony of the defendant and credited the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. It is well settled that issues of credibility are primarily for the hearing court, whose determination should not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Cristobal, 136 AD2d 558; People v Armstead, 98 AD2d…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. ArmsteadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- People v. SirnoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- People v. ZuluagaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Robert Eisemann v. Victor Herbert, Superintendent, Collins Correctional FacilityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- People v. VanegasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- People v. ZadorozhnyiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- People v. GonzalezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. EisemannAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.