Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta People v. Prince 50 N.Y.2d 883

← Cases

People v. Prince

50 N.Y.2d 883 Court N.Y. Decision date 1980-06-05 English

Contents

Majority

p. 883
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Prince, Appellant.
Argued April 30, 1980;
decided June 5, 1980
p. 884
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Harry H. Levine for appellant.
Eugene Gold, District Attorney (A. David Stern of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, defendant’s statement to Assistant District Attorney Friedman suppressed and a new trial ordered.

It being undisputed that defendant’s second statement was made in custody after he had requested the assistance of counsel, suppression of that statement is required (People v Cunningham, 49 NY2d 203 ). In the circumstances here presented, reception of that tainted statement into evidence cannot be deemed harmless error (see People v Garofolo, 46

p. 885
NY2d 592 ). We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.

Cases cited