Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Nadine Panton, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-06-30
Citations: 27 N.Y.3d 1144
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nadine Panton, Appellant.
Judges: Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia concur.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 27
Pages: 1144–1145

Head Matter:
[57 NE3d 1095, 37 NYS3d 58]
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nadine Panton, Appellant.
Argued June 2, 2016;
decided June 30, 2016
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York City {Robin Nichinsky of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York City {David P. Stromes of counsel), and Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx {Joseph N. Ferdenzi, Peter D. Coddington and T Charles Won of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant contends that police engaged in improper pre-Miranda custodial interrogation and, as a result, her post- Miranda written and video statements should have been suppressed. Because defendant did not raise this particular ground either in her suppression motion or at the hearing, it is unpre-served for our review (see People v Gonzalez, 55 NY2d 887, 888 [1982]).
We have considered defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit.
Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia concur.
Order affirmed, in a memorandum.