From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gadson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 30, 1997
239 A.D.2d 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

May 30, 1997

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly denied the motion to suppress defendant's statement to the police. The statements made by defendant before he received Miranda warnings were spontaneous and were not the product of police interrogation or its functional equivalent (see, People v Hylton, 198 A.D.2d 301, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 925). Although there was evidence at the suppression hearing indicating that defendant appeared to be intoxicated, there was no evidence that he was so intoxicated as to render the statements inadmissible (see, People v. Schompert, 19 N.Y.2d 300, 305-307, cert denied 389 U.S. 874). (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Cunningham, J. — Criminal Possession Weapon, 2nd Degree.)


Summaries of

People v. Gadson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 30, 1997
239 A.D.2d 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Gadson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAMION E. GADSON…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: May 30, 1997

Citations

239 A.D.2d 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
661 N.Y.S.2d 803

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

The officers did not ask him any questions or take any action to elicit the statements. The evidence before…

People v. Nenni

Although there was conflicting testimony with respect to whether defendant was intoxicated when he gave a…