Legal Opinion
People v. Flecha
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided July 16, 1993PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he was subjected to custodial interrogation without the benefit of Miranda warnings (see, Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436, reh denied sub nom. California v Stewart, 385 US 890) and therefore that his statements to the police should be suppressed. We find that defendant was not in custody prior to the time that he told the police that he "did it”. Defendant was told by Rochester police officers that the Batavia police wanted to talk to him. Defendant was asked if he would accompany the officers to the Rochester Police Department…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- People v. YuklNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- In re Kwok T.New York Court of Appeals · 1977
- California v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
3Cited by15 opinions
- People v. EllisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- People v. DozierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- People v. MurphyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. FlechaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. JacobsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.