PEOPLE v. BERRYHILL (2009)

On appeal from a judgment convicting her, upon a plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [2] ), defendant contends that County Court erred in refusing to suppress her statements to the police.   We reject that contention.   The court properly determined that defendant was not in custody at the time she made her statements, and “the court's determination will not be disturbed where, as here, it is supported in the record” (People v. Little, 259 A.D.2d 1031, 1032, 688 N.Y.S.2d 313, lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 926, 693 N.Y.S.2d 510, 715 N.E.2d 513;  see generally People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380).   We reject the further contention of defendant that she was misled by deceptive police tactics when they allegedly informed her that one of the individuals questioning her was a mental health professional (see generally People v. Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1, 11, 427 N.Y.S.2d 944, 405 N.E.2d 188).   The record of the suppression hearing establishes that the police introduced the individual in question as a professor, and he informed defendant that he taught courses in “psychological stress evaluation.”   Also contrary to the contention of defendant, the police did not induce her to make her statements by making “false promises” to her (see People v. Van Kuren, 1 A.D.3d 960, 961, 767 N.Y.S.2d 323, lv. denied 1 N.Y.3d 635, 777 N.Y.S.2d 34, 808 N.E.2d 1293).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: