Legal Opinion

People v. Miguel

New York Court of Appeals

Decided May 14, 1981PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

At the suppression hearing, defendant contended only that the statements in question should be excluded because they were obtained in violation of his right to counsel and that the eyewitness identification should be excluded because it was inherently unreliable. Both of these contentions were properly rejected below. Inasmuch as defendant failed to object to the admission of this evidence on the ground that it was obtained in violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment of the United States…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dunaway v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. United States v. CrewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. People v. MartinNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. People v. GreerNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
  5. People v. LettNew York Court of Appeals · 1976

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. People v. UdzinskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  2. People v. GloverNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. People v. GreenNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  4. People v. MiddletonNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  5. People v. JonesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API