Legal Opinion

People v. Hamelinck

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

Decided December 22, 1995PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly denied the motion to suppress defendant’s statements to the police. The officer’s assurance that defendant would be permitted to go home after giving his statement did not create "a substantial risk that the defendant might falsely incriminate himself’ (CPL 60.45 [2] [b] [i]; see, People v Richardson, 202 AD2d 958, 959, lv denied 83 NY2d 914). The unsworn testimony of the victim provided sufficient corroboration of defendant’s admissions to support the conviction (see, CPL 60.50; People v Knights, 131 AD2d 924, 925-926, lv…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. ShedrickNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
  2. People v. RichardsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  3. People v. PhilippAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  4. People v. KnightsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. LawAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
  2. People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API