Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing court properly denied that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements. The evidence adduced at the hearing established that the statements were spontaneous in nature and, thus, admissible in the absence of Miranda warnings (see, People v Buffa,
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.
PEOPLE v. SMITH
278 A.D.2d 516 (2000)
717 N.Y.S.2d 920
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CARL SMITH, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided December 26, 2000.
Decided December 26, 2000.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.