People v. Rodriguez
Decision Date | 08 November 2013 |
Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. David RODRIGUEZ, Defendant–Appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Daniel J. Doyle, J.), rendered March 30, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree.
Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (James Eckert of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.
Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Geoffrey Kaeuper of Counsel), for Respondent.
On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.75[1][b] ), defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in refusing to suppress statements that he made in his home to a police investigator who was executing a search warrant. We reject that contention. The court properly determined that Miranda warnings were not required because defendant was not in custody when he made the statements at issue ( see People v. Witherspoon, 66 A.D.3d 1456, 1458, 885 N.Y.S.2d 829,lv. denied13 N.Y.3d 942, 895 N.Y.S.2d 333, 922 N.E.2d 922;People v. Nunez, 51 A.D.3d 1398, 1400, 857 N.Y.S.2d 854,lv. denied11 N.Y.3d 792, 866 N.Y.S.2d 618, 896 N.E.2d 104;People v. Soroka, 28 A.D.3d 1219, 1220, 813 N.Y.S.2d 619,lv. denied7 N.Y.3d 818, 822 N.Y.S.2d 493, 855 N.E.2d 809). Defendant was not handcuffed or otherwise restrained during the interview or the execution of the search warrant, and he was free to move about the apartment ( see People v. Cerrato, 24 N.Y.2d 1, 8, 298 N.Y.S.2d 688, 246 N.E.2d 501,cert. denied397 U.S. 940, 90 S.Ct. 951, 25 L.Ed.2d 120;People v. Lavere, 236 A.D.2d 809, 809, 654 N.Y.S.2d 61,lv. denied90 N.Y.2d 860, 661 N.Y.S.2d 187, 683 N.E.2d 1061). Defendant was not told that he was under arrest and, indeed, the investigator left the apartment without arresting defendant ( see Cerrato, 24 N.Y.2d at 8–9, 298 N.Y.S.2d 688, 246 N.E.2d 501;Soroka, 28 A.D.3d at 1220, 813 N.Y.S.2d 619;Lavere, 236 A.D.2d at 809, 654 N.Y.S.2d 61). We conclude that, under those circumstances, a reasonable person innocent of any wrongdoing would not have believed that he or she was in custody ( see People v. Paulman, 5 N.Y.3d 122, 129, 800 N.Y.S.2d 96, 833 N.E.2d 239;People v. Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585, 589, 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;Lavere, 236 A.D.2d at 809, 654 N.Y.S.2d 61).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Thomas, 1016
...was never handcuffed or otherwise restrained, and defendant was free to move during the interview (see People v. Rodriguez , 111 A.D.3d 1333, 1333–1334, 974 N.Y.S.2d 827 [4th Dept. 2013], lv denied 22 N.Y.3d 1158, 984 N.Y.S.2d 642, 7 N.E.3d 1130 [2014] ; People v. Ramirez , 243 A.D.2d 734, ......
-
People v. Harris
...anyone else inside the residence. Those statements are admissible inasmuch as defendant was not in custody (see People v. Rodriguez, 111 A.D.3d 1333, 1333, 974 N.Y.S.2d 827, lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 1158, 984 N.Y.S.2d 642, 7 N.E.3d 1130 ; see generally People v. Paulman, 5 N.Y.3d 122, 129, 800 ......
-
People v. Hill
...in custody at the time she spoke to the Investigator, and thus Miranda warnings were not required (see People v. Rodriguez , 111 A.D.3d 1333, 1333-1334, 974 N.Y.S.2d 827 [4th Dept. 2013], lv denied 22 N.Y.3d 1158, 984 N.Y.S.2d 642, 7 N.E.3d 1130 [2014] ; People v. Murphy , 43 A.D.3d 1276, 1......
-
People v. Hill
... ... Department of Labor Investigator, the court erred in refusing ... to suppress the statement that she made to him. Even were we ... to assume that the Investigator was acting as an agent of the ... police (cf. generally People v Rodriguez, 135 A.D.3d ... 1181, 1184-1185 [3d Dept 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d ... 936 [2016]), it is well settled that "the safeguards ... required by Miranda are not triggered unless a ... suspect is subject to custodial interrogation ... [and t]he ... standard for assessing a ... ...