THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. WARREN GLOVER DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2013)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. WARREN J. GLOVER, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

KA 10–00503

Decided: September 27, 2013

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND LINDLEY, JJ.

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (DREW R. DUBRIN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (MATTHEW DUNHAM OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05[4] ). Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court properly refused to suppress his written and oral statements to the police. The record establishes that defendant's statements were voluntarily made; there is no indication in the record of the suppression hearing that he “ ‘was intoxicated to the degree of mania, or of being unable to understand the meaning of his statements' “ (People v. Schompert, 19 N.Y.2d 300, 305, cert denied 389 U.S. 874; see People v. Peterkin, 89 AD3d 1455, 1455, lv denied 18 NY3d 885; People v. Prober, 298 A.D.2d 966, 967, lv denied 99 N.Y.2d 538).

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network