New York Court of Appeals, 1994

People v. Johnson

New York Court of Appeals · Decided December 8, 1994 · Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick Concur

644 N.E.2d 1378; 84 N.Y.2d 956; 620 N.Y.S.2d 822; 1994 N.Y. LEXIS 4119 (North Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision.

In re Grand Jury Proceedings (3d Cir. 1997)
In re Grand Jury Proceedings, Unemancipated Minor Child (District Court, E.D. Washington 1996)
People v. Stover (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
People v. Stover (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
People v. Johnson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
People v. Bierenbaum (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
Derbyshire v. Safir (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
People v. Lewis (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
People v. Major (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
People v. Hilligas (New York Supreme Court 1998)
In re: Grand Jury (3d Cir. 1997)
In re Inquest Proceedings (Vt. 1996)

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Whether the police knew or should have known defendant was actually represented by counsel on the matter for which he was in custody (People v Rogers, 48 NY2d 167), as he alleges, the record supported the determination of both lower courts that defendant’s mother and brother were not acting as agents of the police when they spoke to defendant about his killing of his mother’s long-time live-in companion (CPL 60.45 [2] Ob]; People v Ray, 65 NY2d 282). Moreover, a parent-child testimonial privilege (which defendant urges be adopted to preclude his mother’s testimony) would not even arguably apply in that defendant was 28 years old at the time of the conversation with his mother; another family member was present; the mother testified before the Grand Jury hearing evidence against defendant; and the conversation concerned a crime committed against a member of the household.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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