Legal Opinion · Dissent
People v. Mandrachio
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 3, 1981Published
1Dissent
Carro, J. (dissenting).
As indicated, the rendition of the Miranda warnings by the prosecutor proceeded in part as follows:
“Q. Mr. Mandrachio, what I’m saying is that you have the right to an attorney now or anytime in the future.
“A. Yes.
“Q. If you can’t afford one, one will be given to you free of charge.
“A. I can’t afford one.
“Q. Have you understood everything I have told you?
“A. Yes.
“Q. Having understood everything I told you I would like to ask you about the death of Anthony Edwards.”
*285The implication from defendant’s response that “I can’t afford one” might well be, “therefore give me one…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- People v. HuntleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1965
- People v. WoodardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978