In this month’s column, we address a case construing the effect of a lengthy coercive police interrogation on a subsequent confession made in the presence of counsel. We also discuss the court’s determination that a seemingly minor defect in a notary’s affirmation invalidated an otherwise enforceable prenuptial agreement. Finally, we discuss the court’s response to questions certified by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the existence of a private right of action under the General Business Law provisions preventing the termination of service agreements.
Conviction Overturned
The court recently issued another opinion in a criminal appeal that raises serious constitutional issues. In People v. Guilford, the court found that a defendant’s 49 1/2-hour long custodial interrogation rendered his subsequent murder confession involuntary despite the fact that there was an eight-hour break between the interrogation and the confession and despite the fact that his counsel was present at his confession. In an opinion by Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, the court found that the break in questioning and the presence of counsel were not sufficient to remove the taint from the prior coercive interrogation. Judges Victoria Graffeo, Susan Phillips Read, Robert Smith, Eugene Pigott Jr. and Jenny Rivera joined in the opinion. Judge Sheila Abdus-Salaam took no part in the decision.
