Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Anthony ACOSTA, Defendant–Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dorothy Cropper, J.), rendered September 24, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's motion to suppress was properly denied, based upon the hearing court's finding that defendant had failed to present any evidence at the hearing either that he had been represented by counsel in the two pending cases for which bench warrants had been issued years earlier, or that the police were aware of such representation when, after arresting defendant on the two warrants, they questioned defendant regarding the instant matter, which was unrelated to either of the pending cases (see, People v. Rosa, 65 N.Y.2d 380, 492 N.Y.S.2d 542, 482 N.E.2d 21). We reject defendant's argument that the police had a duty to inquire as to whether defendant was represented on the pending unrelated charges (see, People v. Bing, 76 N.Y.2d 331, 559 N.Y.S.2d 474, 558 N.E.2d 1011). In any event, even if defendant had been represented, with the knowledge of the police, on the unrelated charges, the Rogers rule (People v. Rogers, 48 N.Y.2d 167, 422 N.Y.S.2d 18, 397 N.E.2d 709) upon which defendant relies, would be inapplicable because defendant had not remained in custody on those charges but had instead been released and rearrested on the bench warrants (see, People v. Burdo, 91 N.Y.2d 146, 667 N.Y.S.2d 970, 690 N.E.2d 854; People v. Steward, 88 N.Y.2d 496, 646 N.Y.S.2d 974, 670 N.E.2d 214; People v. Bing, supra ).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 25, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)