Legal Opinion

People v. Paulman

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 29, 2005PublishedCited by 257 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Graffeo, J.

During a child sexual abuse investigation, defendant made four incriminating statements to the police in successive interrogations spanning a period of several hours. The Appellate Division ruled that one of the statements was inadmissible because it had not been preceded by Miranda warnings. The primary issue presented in this case is whether two statements defendant made after he was given Miranda warnings and waived his right to remain silent should have been suppressed due to the prior, unwarned statement. Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Oregon v. ElstadSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Missouri v. SeibertSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. People v. YuklNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
  5. People v. ChappleNew York Court of Appeals · 1975

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by257 opinions

  1. People v. ConcepcionNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
  2. State v. VondehnOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  3. People v. WhiteNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
  4. People v. BradfordNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. People v. GuilfordNew York Court of Appeals · 2013

252 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API