People v. Griffith
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant contends that his statements to law enforcement officials should have been suppressed on the ground that they were obtained in violation of his indelible right to counsel. We disagree.
The indelible right to counsel, prohibiting interrogation unless the right is waived in the presence of counsel, attaches, inter alia, when a criminal action is formally commenced by the filing of an accusatory instrument (see People v Grice, 100 NY2d 318, 320-321 [2003]; People v Ramos, 99 NY2d 27, 32-33 [2002]). Here, however, no indictment had been filed in this matter at the time of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. RamosNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
- People v. GriceNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- People v. DicksonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- United States v. GiacaloneDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1980
- People v. TimmonsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
3Cited by1 opinion
- People v. C.R. & D.W.New York Supreme Court · 2012