Opinion
March 1, 1999
Appeal from the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.).
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
The hearing court properly found that the totality of the circumstances supported, the conclusion that the defendant's confessions were voluntarily made and not precipitated by psychological coercion on the part of law enforcement officials ( see, People v. Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1; cf., People v. Yarter, 50 A.D.2d 1019). In addition, the defendant's contention that the delay in his arraignment was for the sole purpose of depriving him of his right to counsel is meritless. As a general rule, "`an unnecessary delay in arraignment, without more, does not cause the accused's critical stage right to counsel to attach automatically and, absent extraordinary circumstances, a delay in arraignment is but one factor to consider in assessing the voluntariness of a confession'" ( People v. Quartieri, 171 A.D.2d 889, 891; People v. Mosely, 135 A.D.2d 662, 663-664; see also, People v. Hopkins, 58 N.Y.2d 1079; People v. Holland, 48 N.Y.2d 861). The delay in the defendant's arraignment was not designed to enable him to be questioned outside the presence of counsel, but rather was due to the defendant's disclosure of his role in serious and multiple homicides about which the details had to be obtained and verified by the police ( see, People v. Beckham, 174 A.D.2d 748; People v. Smith, 161 A.D.2d 817, cert denied 498 U.S. 1100).
O'Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.