Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta People v. Gamble 70 N.Y.2d 885

← Cases

People v. Gamble

70 N.Y.2d 885 Court N.Y. Decision date 1987-12-15 English

Contents

Majority

p. 885
The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Ronald Gamble, Respondent.
Argued November 9, 1987;
decided December 15, 1987
p. 886
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Kathleen E. Fay and Mark Dwyer of counsel), for appellant.
Robert S. Dean and Philip L. Weinstein for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division, insofar as appealed from, should be affirmed.

We agree with the majority at the Appellate Division that defendant’s written confession and portions of his oral statement were obtained in violation of his right to counsel, which he invoked by his negative response when asked whether he was "willing to answer questions without an attorney present” (see, People v Carmine A., 53 NY2d 816 , 818; People v Cunningham, 49 NY2d 203 ). Accordingly, the Appellate Division properly ruled that such oral and written statements should have been suppressed.

The Appellate Division’s determination that defendant’s remaining statements were admissible because they were made spontaneously is not before us on this appeal inasmuch as defendant, the party aggrieved by that ruling, is not an appellant here.

p. 887
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.

Order insofar as appealed from affirmed in a memorandum.

Cases cited