From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ryff

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 1, 1970
262 N.E.2d 222 (N.Y. 1970)

Opinion

Argued May 13, 1970

Decided July 1, 1970

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, THOMAS DICKENS, J.

Burton B. Roberts, District Attorney ( Robert L. Ricken and Daniel J. Sullivan of counsel), for appellant.

Joel Berger and Milton Adler for respondent.


MEMORANDUM. Order modified by limiting the suppression of evidence to statements made by defendant after his arrest without the warning required by Miranda v. Arizona ( 384 U.S. 436) and, as modified, affirmed. The pedigree statements and acts of defendant made initially to the police for identification were admissible ( People v. Rivera, 26 N.Y.2d 304; Farley v. United States, 381 F.2d 357, cert. den. 389 U.S. 942; Clarke v. State, 3 Md. App. 447). These include the name stated by him and the credit card exhibited.

Chief Judge FULD and Judges SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON concur; Judge BURKE taking no part.

Order modified in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Ryff

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 1, 1970
262 N.E.2d 222 (N.Y. 1970)
Case details for

People v. Ryff

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. JOHN J. RYFF, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 1, 1970

Citations

262 N.E.2d 222 (N.Y. 1970)
262 N.E.2d 222
314 N.Y.S.2d 17

Citing Cases

People v. Rodriguez

" ( People v Rivera, 26 N.Y.2d 304, 309.) Pedigree statements made to the police for identification purposes…

People v. Jones

Extensive research has not disclosed any case precisely in point. However, there is much authority to affirm…