Case ID: ny-2d_71/html/0845-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles Fridman, Appellant.
    Argued February 9, 1988;
    decided March 24, 1988
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Mark F. Pomerantz, David T. Grudberg and Herald Price Fahringer for appellant.
    
      Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Ann M. Donnelly and Norman Barclay of counsel), for respondent.
   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 concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum. 
      
       Designated pursuant to NY Constitution, article VI, § 2.