From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 25, 1984
101 A.D.2d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Opinion

May 25, 1984

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Lewis County, Lynch, J.

Present — Hancock, Jr., J.P., Callahan, Doerr, O'Donnell and Moule, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law and facts, and a new trial granted. Memorandum: In an appeal from his conviction for first degree robbery (Penal Law, § 160.15), defendant assigns several errors, two of which require reversal. ¶ First, following the filing of a felony information and defendant's arrest pursuant to a warrant, Lewis County deputy sheriffs engaged in general questioning which resulted in defendant leading them to the location of the gun used in the robbery and the money that was stolen from a Convenient Store. Defendant's indelible right to counsel had attached (see People v Samuels, 49 N.Y.2d 218), and his interrogation by the deputies in the absence of counsel was impermissible. Therefore the testimony of the deputies concerning defendant's statements, as well as the gun and the money, should have been suppressed. ¶ Further, prior to defendant's apprehension, an eyewitness was shown defendant's identification card, bearing his name and photograph. The court erred in its determination that this photographic identification procedure was not suggestive (see People v Fuller, 71 A.D.2d 589; People v Leonard, 66 A.D.2d 805). Prior to the retrial, a further hearing should be held to determine whether, despite the suggestiveness of the photographic identification, the witness had an independent basis for her in-court identification (see People v Adams, 53 N.Y.2d 241). ¶ We have examined defendant's other contentions and find them to be without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 25, 1984
101 A.D.2d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
Case details for

People v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DONAHUE ARTHUR MILLER…

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

Date published: May 25, 1984

Citations

101 A.D.2d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Citing Cases

People v. Baba-Ali

Since the statute uses the phrase "in part" it is clear that the Appellate Division has the authority to take…