People v. Nolcox
| Decision Date | 16 February 1993 |
| Citation | 593 N.Y.S.2d 835,190 A.D.2d 824 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. David NOLCOX, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Haward, Parker & Martens, Middletown (Richard L. Parker, of counsel), for appellant.
Francis D. Phillips II, Dist. Atty., Goshen (John Goldsmith, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANGANO, P.J., and ROSENBLATT, RITTER and SANTUCCI, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Pano Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered September 21, 1989, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress certain statements made by him to law enforcement officials.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
It is well settled that the test to determine whether a person is in custody so as to trigger the requirement that Miranda warnings be given is whether a reasonable person, innocent of any crime, would have thought that he or she was in custody (see, People v. Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585, 307 N.Y.S.2d 857, 256 N.E.2d 172, cert. denied 400 U.S. 851, 91 S.Ct. 78, 27 L.Ed.2d 89). That the questioning takes place in a police station, or that a person is read his or her rights, does not automatically transform investigatory questioning into a custodial interrogation, even if that person is a "suspect" (see, People v. Smedman, 184 A.D.2d 600, 584 N.Y.S.2d 627). In the case before us, the defendant voluntarily agreed to accompany the police officers to the station house for questioning. At no time were his movements restricted, nor was he subjected to displays of official force or power (see, People v. Blake, 177 A.D.2d 636, 576 N.Y.S.2d). That the defendant was advised of his constitutional rights at one point during his conversation with the Captain does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that he was in custody (see, People v. Eke-Spiff, 128 A.D.2d 889, 513 N.Y.S.2d 814; People v. Oates, 104 A.D.2d 907, 480 N.Y.S.2d 518).
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence established that the victim died as a result of a knife wound to the chest which pierced her heart, and as a result of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Wrigglesworth
...People v. Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585, 307 N.Y.S.2d 857, 256 N.E.2d 172, cert. denied 400 U.S. 851, 91 S.Ct. 78, 27 L.Ed.2d 89; People v. Nolcox, 190 A.D.2d 824, 593 N.Y.S.2d 835, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 1017, 600 N.Y.S.2d 205, 616 N.E.2d 862; see also, Matter of Kwok T., 43 N.Y.2d 213, 401 N.Y.S.2d 5......
-
People v. Burroughs, Indictment No.: 09-1566
...does the fact that the detective, in an apparent excess of caution, read him Miranda warnings (People v. Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585); People v. Nolcox, 190 A.D.2d 824; and see, People v. Blake, 177 A.D.2d 636). Nevertheless in evaluating the voluntariness of the defendant's statements, this Court ......
-
People v. Smith
...a person is read the Miranda warnings, does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the person was in custody (see, People v. Nolcox, 190 A.D.2d 824, 593 N.Y.S.2d 835, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 1017, 600 N.Y.S.2d 205, 616 N.E.2d 862). Defendant voluntarily agreed to go to the police station ......
-
People v. Louis
... ... Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585, 307 N.Y.S.2d 857, 256 N.E.2d 172, cert. denied 400 U.S. 851, 91 S.Ct. 78, 27 L.Ed.2d 89; People v. Sullivan, 224 A.D.2d 460, 638 N.Y.S.2d 116; People v. Nolcox, 190 ... A.D.2d 824, 593 N.Y.S.2d 835; People v. Smedman, 184 A.D.2d 600, 584 N.Y.S.2d 627), nor involuntarily (see, People v. Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1, 427 N.Y.S.2d 944, 405 N.E.2d 188; People v. Louis, 239 A.D.2d 435, 657 N.Y.S.2d 436; People v. Ingram, 208 A.D.2d 561, 616 N.Y.S.2d 780; People ... ...