Summary
In People v Prince (50 N.Y.2d 883), the Court of Appeals applied the Cunningham rule to conduct occurring in December of 1976, reversing a conviction rendered by Criminal Term, March 10, 1978 and affirmed without opinion by this court July 2, 1979.
Summary of this case from People v. GordonOpinion
Argued April 30, 1980
Decided June 5, 1980
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, JOSEPH R. CORSO, J.
Harry H. Levine for appellant.
Eugene Gold, District Attorney (A. David Stern of counsel), for respondent.
MEMORANDUM.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, defendant's statement to Assistant District Attorney Friedman suppressed and a new trial ordered.
It being undisputed that defendant's second statement was made in custody after he had requested the assistance of counsel, suppression of that statement is required (People v Cunningham, 49 N.Y.2d 203). In the circumstances here presented, reception of that tainted statement into evidence cannot be deemed harmless error (see People v Garofolo, 46 N.Y.2d 592). We have examined defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur in memorandum.
Order reversed, etc.