People v. Ruggles
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends, for the first time on appeal, that his statements to the police should have been suppressed because they resulted from an arrest at his home without a warrant and in the absence of exigent circumstances (Payton v New York, 445 US 573). That issue was not raised before the suppression court and, therefore, is not preserved for appellate review (see, People v Smith, 55 NY2d 888, 890; People v Gonzalez, 55 NY2d 887, 888; People v Martin, 50 NY2d 1029, 1030-1031; see also, People v Claudio, 64 NY2d 858).
Further, we reject defendant’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- People v. MartinNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- People v. ClaudioNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- People v. GonzalezNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. OwusuAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- People v. SwimleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- People v. AdamsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- People v. MajorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- People v. GomezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.