People v. Fridman
Cases that cite this one
30 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- People v. Arneo (Webster Justice Court 2024)
- People v. Silburn (N.Y. 2018)
- People v. Dearmas (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
- The People v. Malik Dawson (N.Y. 2022)
- The People v. Malik Dawson (N.Y. 2022)
- People v. Meadows (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- People v. Silburn (N.Y. 2018)
- JACKSON, AARON, PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Jackson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Jackson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Higgins (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- People v. Phoenix (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Phoenix (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Oxley (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
- People v. Edwards (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- People v. Piggott (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- People v. Hilts (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- People v. Mitchell (N.Y. 2004)
- People v. Lopez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- People v. Brandon (Criminal Court of the City of New York 2003)
- People v. Wacht (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
- People v. Holman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
- People v. Marshall (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- People v. Snickles (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
- People v. Negron (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
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.
In the context of the conversation between the defendant and the police, the defendant’s suggestions that he or the police might want to consult with his attorney with respect to certain matters cannot be said to constitute an unequivocal assertion of the right to counsel. In addition, we note that the defendant was not in custody, was in his own office and continued the discussion with the police as if the suggestions had never been made.
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Dillon
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Designated pursuant to NY Constitution, article VI, § 2.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.