Opinion
February 16, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flaherty, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed.
Contrary to the People's contention, there is ample evidence in the record to support the hearing court's determination that the defendant's inculpatory statement was the product of unlawful police questioning. Assuming that the initial questioning of the defendant on October 21, 1997, was proper, and that the defendant thereafter voluntarily accompanied detectives to the precinct house, it is clear that once the detectives verified the information provided by the defendant, they no longer possessed a founded suspicion of any criminal activity so as to justify the continued common-law inquiry of the defendant ( see, People v. Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181; People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210). Given the circumstances presented and the logical inferences to be drawn therefrom, and according due deference to the determination of the hearing court ( see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759), we discern no basis for disturbing the order of suppression.
Miller, J. P., Ritter, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.