People v. Starks
| Decision Date | 18 April 1988 |
| Citation | 139 A.D.2d 681,527 N.Y.S.2d 358 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Andre STARKS, Appellant |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (Jeffrey Dellheim, of counsel), for appellant.
Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood, Richard J. Cutler and Aaron F. Fishbein, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and MANGANO, BROWN and HARWOOD, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Finnegan, J.), rendered March 19, 1986, convicting him of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree, robbery in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree (two counts), assault in the second degree (two counts), and robbery 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 statements made by him to the police.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the hearing court erred in determining that he executed a voluntary and intelligent waiver of his constitutional rights prior to making any statements. We disagree. The court's findings that the defendant was given Miranda warnings ( see, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694) and voluntarily chose to waive them are amply supported by the record. Furthermore, the fact that approximately 9 1/2 hours elapsed between the point at which the defendant was advised of and waived his rights and his admission does not render the interrogation inherently coercive. "It is well/settled that where a person in police custody has been issued Miranda warnings and voluntarily and intelligently waives those rights, it is not necessary to repeat the warnings prior to subsequent questioning within a reasonable time thereafter, so long as the custody has remained continuous". ( People v. Glinsman, 107 A.D.2d 710, 484 N.Y.S.2d 64, cert. denied 472 U.S. 1021, 105 S.Ct. 3487, 87 L.Ed.2d 621; People v. Crosby, 91 A.D.2d 20, 29, 457 N.Y.S.2d 831, lv. denied 58 N.Y.2d 974, 460 N.Y.S.2d 1032, 447 N.E.2d 92).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Zappulla v. New York
...between the issuance of the Miranda warnings and the subsequent interrogation has been less than 12 hours (see, People v. Starks, 139 A.D.2d 681, 527 N.Y.S.2d 358 (2d Dep't 1988) [9½ hours]; People v. Baker, 208 A.D.2d 758, 617 N.Y.S.2d 798 (2d Dep't 1994) [8 hours]; People v. Thomas, 233 A......
-
People v. Betancourt
...188;People v. DeCampoamor, 91 A.D.3d at 670–671, 936 N.Y.S.2d 256;People v. Miles, 276 A.D.2d 566, 714 N.Y.S.2d 714;People v. Starks, 139 A.D.2d 681, 682, 527 N.Y.S.2d 358). Moreover, there is no evidence that the defendant's physical condition impaired or undermined his ability to freely c......
-
People v. Deskovic
...and supplied a sample of his own blood. In addition, he was on several occasions advised of his Miranda rights (see, People v. Starks, 139 A.D.2d 681, 527 N.Y.S.2d 358; People v. Crosby, 91 A.D.2d 20, 457 N.Y.S.2d 831). Far from being in custody, coerced, or in any way restrained, the defen......
-
People v. Breland
...N.Y.2d 889, 487 N.Y.S.2d 1036, 476 N.E.2d 1013, cert. denied 472 U.S. 1021, 105 S.Ct. 3487, 87 L.Ed.2d 621; see also, People v. Starks, 139 A.D.2d 681, 527 N.Y.S.2d 358). The fact that there was no interruption of custody effectively eliminated any potential belief on the part of the defend......