Defendant's motion to suppress statements was properly denied. The record fails to support defendant's claim that her statements were the product of continuous police interrogation for a period of almost 12 hours. On the contrary, during this period of time, defendant was offered food and drink and there was a break of several hours between the making of written and videotaped statements (compare, People v Anderson,
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.
