From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bush

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 16, 1995
220 A.D.2d 607 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

October 16, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Aiello, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

After voluntarily accompanying the police to headquarters concerning an incident that occurred in the 77th Precinct, the police told the defendant that two eyewitnesses had identified him as being at the scene of the shooting. By their own admission, the police had no grounds for this accusation. In response, the defendant replied, "I didn't shoot him, Shortly shot him". At this point the defendant was immediately advised of his Miranda rights. Thereafter, the defendant made inculpatory oral, audiotaped, and videotaped statements.

The defendant claims that he was subjected to custodial interrogation. However, it is clear that a person innocent of any crime would not have believed that he was under arrest under the circumstances then present merely because the police asserted that he was at the scene of the shooting ( see, People v. Walls, 199 A.D.2d 292; People v. Spellman, 168 A.D.2d 318). Thus, the hearing court properly denied suppression of the statements made by the defendant to law enforcement officials.

The defendant's sentence was not excessive ( see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review. Mangano, P.J., Balletta, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Bush

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 16, 1995
220 A.D.2d 607 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Bush

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RONNIE BUSH, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 16, 1995

Citations

220 A.D.2d 607 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 621

Citing Cases

People v. Bonefonte

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not subjected to a…