From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Schultz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 4, 1991
176 A.D.2d 1239 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

October 4, 1991

Appeal from the Jefferson County Court, Clary, J.

Present — Callahan, A.P.J., Denman, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The court properly refused to suppress defendant's oral statements, rejecting his contention that they were the product of custodial interrogation. Defendant was questioned in his home for about one hour, his freedom was unrestricted, and the court was entitled to believe the police officer's testimony that defendant never asked him to leave (see, e.g., Matter of Kwok T., 43 N.Y.2d 213; see generally, People v Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585, 588, mot to amend remittitur denied 26 N.Y.2d 845, cert denied 400 U.S. 851; People v Baird, 155 A.D.2d 918, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 963).

We have examined defendant's remaining arguments on appeal and find them to be lacking in merit.


Summaries of

People v. Schultz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 4, 1991
176 A.D.2d 1239 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Schultz

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CLIFFORD DUANE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Oct 4, 1991

Citations

176 A.D.2d 1239 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
576 N.Y.S.2d 735

Citing Cases

People v. Zuke

In addition, defendant's contention that the court should have suppressed the statement on the ground that…

PEOPLE v. ZUKE

In addition, defendant's contention that the court should have suppressed the statement on the ground that…