Legal Opinion

People v. Tindal

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

Decided January 27, 1984PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, motion to suppress granted and a new trial granted. Memorandum: On appeal from his conviction of rape, first degree, defendant argues that the court erred in its ruling after a hearing on remand (see People v Tindal, 92 AD2d 717) that statements made by him to police without the assistance of counsel on June 9, 1978 were admissible. We agree. At the time defendant gave the statements, other charges were pending with respect to which the police knew defendant was represented by counsel. Thus defendant could not effectively waive his right to counsel…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. BartolomeoNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. People v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. People v. GrohAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
  4. People v. TindalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  5. People v. TinelliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. WesleyNew York Supreme Court · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API