The pattern that has characterized the decisions of the New York Court of Appeals in criminal law in recent years continued this past term. The Court decided only 46 criminal cases, of which 29 were memorandum decisions—short, unsigned opinions, often followed by lengthy (and sometimes sharp) dissents. Judges Rivera and Wilson were frequent dissenters: Judge Rivera dissented in 15 cases, and Judge Wilson in 17; typically they dissented together. Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Garcia, Singas and Cannataro were in the majority in every case. No new rights were created; indeed, many of the cases were of little interest to anyone but the parties.
Perhaps the most assailed decision of the term was the 5 to 2 ruling in People v. Dawson, 2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 02772, in which the question was whether the defendant, a 19-year-old, had unequivocally requested the assistance of counsel during a custodial interrogation. Arrested for sexual assault, Dawson was read his Miranda rights, and this colloquy followed:
Detective: “Do you understand each of your rights?”
Dawson: “Yeah, definitely. I just wish that I’d memorized my lawyer’s number. He’s in my phone. Is it possible for me to call him or something?”
Detective: “Do you want your lawyer here?”
Dawson: “Right now?”
Detective: “Yeah.”
Dawson: “If I could get a hold of him ‘cause I don’t know his number; it’s in my phone.”
Detective: “OK.”
Dawson: “But you could still tell me what’s going on though, right?”
Detective: “No, I can’t talk to you if you if you want your lawyer here and you already said you did, so let’s, you know what, let’s give him a call.”
Dawson: “And if he don’t answer then can you come talk to me?”
Detective: “No.”
Dawson: “So what happens if he don’t answer?”
Detective: “Ah, I mean, we’ll, we’ll deal with that if it happens. Let’s hope he answers. I mean, from the sound of it, it sounds like you understand your Miranda rights and you want your attorney.”
