Legal Opinion

People v. Cerullo

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 27, 1966PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

The judgments of conviction herein are affirmed. Moecio’s arrest as a parole violator was proper. Therefore, his statements were properly received into evidence (cf. People v. Robinson, 13 N Y 2d 296). The failure to hold a voir dire on the voluntariness of Cerullo’s confession was not error because such a procedure was not required at the time of trial herein. There was no fatal prejudice arising out of the joint trial (Code Crim. Pro., § 542).

The cases relied on in the dissent herein (People v. Barbato, 254 N. Y. 170; People v. Valletutti, 297 N. Y. 226) contained proof of objectively…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. People v. BarbatoNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  3. People v. LobelNew York Court of Appeals · 1948
  4. People v. ValletuttiNew York Court of Appeals · 1948

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. McIntyreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. People v. PhieferNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
  3. United States of America Ex Rel. Vincent Cerullo v. Harold W. Follette, Warden of Green Haven PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968
  4. United States ex rel. Cerullo v. FolletteDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API