People v. Diaz
Opinion of the Court
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, suppression of his statements and the physical evidence recovered as a result thereof was properly denied. The defendant voluntarily confessed to the police after receiving Miranda warnings (see, Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436). “A delay in arraignment, without more, does not cause the right of counsel to attach” (People v Gordon, 273 AD2d 402; see, People v Ortlieb, 84 NY2d 989; People v Hopkins, 58 NY2d 1079; People v McCall, 248 AD2d 557). The hearing court correctly determined that the delay in the defendant’s arraignment was not for the purpose of depriving him of his right to counsel (see, People v Gordon, supra; People v Liles, 243 AD2d 729; People v Ellis, 222 AD2d 519; People v Baker, 208 AD2d 758). Santucci, J. P., S. Miller, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.