People v. Alke
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Contrary to the People’s argument, the defendant’s contention that his oral statements to law enforcement officials should have been suppressed since he was in custody and had not been advised of his Miranda rights (see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 [1966]) is preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]). However, the defendant’s contention is without merit. The evidence adduced at the suppression hearing established that the defendant, who had voluntarily accompanied the police to the police precinct, was not in custody at the time he made his statements to the police (see People v…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- People v. BleakleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. DanielsonNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
- People v. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- People v. HolmesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. WilliamsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. MaisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- People v. RembertAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- People v. Bullard-DanielAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.