People v Panton

People v Panton 2016 NY Slip Op 05181 Decided on June 30, 2016 Court of Appeals Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on June 30, 2016
No. 118

[*1]The People & c., Respondent,

v

Nadine Panton, Appellant.

Robin Nichinsky, for appellant.

David P. Stromes, for respondent.

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 [*2]not raise this particular ground in either her suppression motion or at the hearing, it is unpreserved 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.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Order affirmed, in a memorandum. Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia concur.

Decided June 30, 2016