Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ernest Reynolds, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1974-12-20
Citations: 35 N.Y.2d 937
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ernest Reynolds, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 35
Pages: 937–938

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ernest Reynolds, Appellant.
Argued December 16, 1974;
decided December 20, 1974.
Eliiot Schnapp and William E, Hellerstein for appellant.
Nicholas Ferraro, District Attorney (Charles M. New'ell of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The courts below have found as a fact that the statements made by the defendant to the police were voluntary and not the product of custodial interrogation. Our review on this issue is thus limited to the question of whether there was sufficient evidence to support the hearing court's finding (People v. Yukl, 25 N Y 2d 585; People v. Boone, 22 N Y 2d 476). Since the record supports this affirmed finding of fact, it is binding on this court (People v. Leonti, 18 N Y 2d 384). During the course of defendant's statements to the police, given following adequate Miranda warnings, he revealed that he had a gun, for the illegal possession of which he was found guilty by a jury, secreted in the glove compartment of his automobile. In these circumstances, suppression of the gun was properly denied.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, G-abrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Babin and Stevens concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.