From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Tutt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 7, 1975
47 A.D.2d 911 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

Summary

In People v. Tutt (47 A.D.2d 911, affd 38 N.Y.2d 1011), defendant had been advised of his right to an attorney, but had not explicitly been informed that he was entitled to an attorney during questioning by the police.

Summary of this case from People v. Newson

Opinion

April 7, 1975


Judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered January 29, 1974, affirmed. No opinion. Latham, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur; Hopkins, Acting P.J., concurs under the constraint of People v Dean ( 35 A.D.2d 1000).


Summaries of

People v. Tutt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 7, 1975
47 A.D.2d 911 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

In People v. Tutt (47 A.D.2d 911, affd 38 N.Y.2d 1011), defendant had been advised of his right to an attorney, but had not explicitly been informed that he was entitled to an attorney during questioning by the police.

Summary of this case from People v. Newson
Case details for

People v. Tutt

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DENNIS TUTT, Also…

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

Date published: Apr 7, 1975

Citations

47 A.D.2d 911 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

However, of equal importance in this analysis is the well-established rule that the voluntariness of a…

People v. Newson

Whether a failure of this nature renders the Miranda warnings inadequate is an issue which has not yet…