Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
The People v.Raymond Denson
(2×)
Defendant's further contention that the trial court should have granted his motion to suppress statements he made to law enforcement involves mixed questions of law and fact, and because there is record support for the determinations made below, those determinations are beyond the review power of this Court (see People v Cruz, 90 NY2d 961 , 962 - 17 - - 18 - No. 130 [1997]; People v Harrison, 82 NY2d 693, 694 [1993]; People v Nunez, 80 NY2d 858, 860 [1992]).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Wallace
To the extent that defendant challenges the validity of his Miranda waiver with respect to his later statements at the police station, we conclude that he implicitly waived his rights by agreeing to speak to an investigator after he had received Miranda warnings from the arresting officer and confirmed that he understood his rights (see People v Davis, 55 NY2d 731, 733 [1981]; People v Harris, 129 AD3d 1522 , 1523 [2015], lv denied 27 NY3d 998 [2016]; see also People v Nunez, 176 AD2d 70, 72 [1992], affd 80 NY2d 858 [1992]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Juan \Johnny” Nunez
v.
Juan \Johnny” Nunez
Jul 2, 1992.
600 N.E.2d 626
1992 N.Y. LEXIS 1626
Published | APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, David Seth Michaels for appellant., Paul Czajka, District Attorney (Henry Neal Conolly of counsel), for respondent.
OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed. The determination that a defendant validly waived the constitutional right to remain silent resolves a mixed question of law and fact, and is not subject to further review in this Court where, as here, it is supported by evidence in the record (see, People v Harrison, 57 NY2d 470).
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa.