Legal Opinion

People v. Sumeriski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 4, 1986PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s admissions were not influenced by a promise of favorable treatment and were not obtained in violation of her rights under CPL 60.45 (2) (b) (i) or (ii). The police investigator’s equivocal statement that "maybe” something "can” or "could be” worked out cannot be construed as a direct or an implied promise of leniency (cf. Bram v United States, 168 US 532; People v Hilliard, 117 AD2d 969). Her suppression motion was properly denied. We have examined the other issues raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bram v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. People v. HilliardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. People v. FoxAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  2. People v. OwusuAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  3. People v. BelgenioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  4. People v. FarrellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  5. People v. ButlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

2 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