People v. Whorley
Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10 [1]) and sentencing him to a determinate term of imprisonment of 13 years. Supreme Court properly denied the motion of defendant to suppress two written statements. Based upon the totality of the circumstances under which the statements were made, we conclude that they were voluntary (see, People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38; People v Pearce, 283 AD2d 1007; People v Raymond, 278 AD2d 798, lv denied 96 NY2d 805). Defendant signed the two statements on May 12, 1999, one at 7:00 a.m. and the other at 6:17 p.m. Regardless of whether defendant’s interrogation began at 10:00 p.m. or 11:00 p.m. on May 11, 1999, we conclude that the duration of the interrogation resulting in the signing of defendant’s first statement is not excessive, particularly in view of the fact that defendant signed the statement one hour after he had expressly waived his rights a second time (see, People v Miles, 276 AD2d 566, lv denied 96 NY2d 737). With respect to the second statement, we note that defendant was offered coffee
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.