Judgment unanimously affirmed.
The court properly refused to suppress defendant's oral statements, rejecting his contention that they were the product of custodial interrogation. Defendant was questioned in his home for about one hour, his freedom was unrestricted, and the court was entitled to believe the police officer's testimony that defendant never asked him to leave (see, e.g., Matter...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
