| People v Dunn |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 02572 [83 AD3d 1421] |
| April 1, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alton A.Dunn, Appellant. |
—[*1] Michael C. Green, District Attorney, Rochester (Stephen X. O'Brien of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (John J. Ark, J.), renderedNovember 15, 2007. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in thesecond degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of robberyin the second degree (Penal Law § 160.10 [2] [b]), defendant contends that Supreme Courterred in refusing to suppress statements that he made while in custody at the police station,before he was advised of his Miranda warnings. Although defendant is correct that hehad not been Mirandized when two investigators initially questioned him in an interview room,defendant did not make any inculpatory statements at that time. In fact, he consistently deniedinvolvement in the crime. Defendant was left alone for approximately one hour before one of thetwo investigators returned to the interview room, at which time Miranda warnings wereadministered and the questioning continued. Defendant made the incriminating statements atissue during the second interrogation. Contrary to defendant's contention, we conclude that therewas a sufficiently "definite, pronounced break in the interrogation" to dissipate the taint resultingfrom the initial Miranda violation (People v Chapple, 38 NY2d 112, 115 [1975];see People v Paulman, 5 NY3d122, 130-131 [2005]; People v Smith, 275 AD2d 951 [2000], lv denied 96NY2d 739 [2001]), and that the court therefore properly refused to suppress the incriminatingstatements at issue. We reject defendant's further challenge to the severity of the sentence.Present—Centra, J.P., Peradotto, Lindley, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.