Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
On appeal, the defendant contends that his statements to the police should have been suppressed on the ground that he was not advised of his Miranda rights prior to custodial interrogation. We disagree.
The arresting officer's pre-Miranda inquiry regarding the contents of the defendant's clenched fist was justified in order to protect the officer's welfare (see, People v Chestnut,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.