People State New York v. Oneilo Ruiz

[34 A.D.2d 908 Page 908] The court found the defendant's statements, which were made to the officers on the street prior to their giving the defendant
the Miranda warnings (Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436), were admissible because they were made voluntarily while he was not
in custody. As to those statements, the motion to suppress was denied. The court suppressed all acts performed by the defendant
after the Miranda warnings were given to him on the street, and, specifically, the act of leading the detectives to his automobile.
With reference to those statements made by the defendant after he was given the Miranda warnings and before he arrived at
the police station, the court found the defendant understood all the warnings. Since, however, the detective merely asked
the defendant if he understood, without more, the court held there was not demonstrated a conscious or express waiver [34
A.D.2d 908 Page 909]