New York Court of Appeals, 1985

People v. Ridgeway

New York Court of Appeals · Decided March 21, 1985

64 N.Y.2d 952; 488 N.Y.S.2d 641; 477 N.E.2d 1095; 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 16273

Cases that cite this one

28 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

People v. Polk (New York Supreme Court 2005)
People v. Torres (New York Supreme Court 1987)
People v. Miller (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
People v. Fenelon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
People v. Dobbins (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
People v. Thornton (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
People v. Washington (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
People v. Spencer (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
People v. Thomas (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
People v. Zheng (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
People v. Rice (New York Supreme Court 1998)
People v. Thang Thanh Nguyen (New York Supreme Court 1998)
People v. Motter (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
People v. Howard (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
People v. Setless (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
People v. Parker (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
People v. Ross (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
People v. Slaughter (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
People v. Luna (N.Y. 1989)
In re Grand Jury Subpoena of Stewart (New York Supreme Court 1989)
People v. Griminger (N.Y. 1988)
People v. Hamlin (N.Y. 1988)
People v. Velasquez (N.Y. 1986)
People v. Henderson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
People v. Williams (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

*954For the reasons stated in part II of the opinion of Justice Stewart F. Hancock, Jr., the filing of the complaint and issuance of the arrest warrant in Federal court did not trigger the indelible right to counsel under New York law. The assistance of counsel becomes indispensable when a criminal action is commenced by the State against the defendant, for at that point the defendant “cannot make any arrangement with the police which is not subject to the ultimate approval of the court and there ought be no necessity for further police investigation.” (People v Settles, 46 NY2d 154, 163; see also, People v Samuels, 49 NY2d 218.) That stage was not reached here until after the termination of Federal proceedings and after defendant’s confession. Moreover there is no indication in this record that the Federal arrest was intended or employed by State Police as a device for circumventing defendant’s State right to counsel. The finding of the courts below as to the voluntariness of both defendant’s waiver of her Miranda rights and her confession is supported by the record and therefore cannot be disturbed by this court (see, People v Johnson, 40 NY2d 882, affg 49 AD2d 663). Finally, as to the Bruton issue, there is no error because the two confessions were so similar that no measurable prejudice resulted (see, People v Safian, 46 NY2d 181, cert denied sub nom. Miner v New York, 443 US 912).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.