OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, the motion to suppress granted, and a new trial ordered.
On the present record, it cannot be said that the People carried their heavy burden of proving defendant’s statements voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt (see, e.g., People v Anderson,
During the delay, defendant was subjected to periods of prolonged and vigorous interrogation. He was permitted to languish in his cell at selected intervals and then returned for further questioning at the whim of his interrogators. He was led to believe that if he confessed he would not be incarcerated, nor be returned to Louisiana on an outstanding fugitive warrant, but rather would be assigned to a mental facility. At one point, when defendant began to display an incipient recognition of his need for counsel, an Assistant District Attorney neatly dissuaded defendant from exercising his rights. In short, the circumstances bespeak such a serious disregard of defendant’s rights, and were so conducive to unreliable and involuntary statements, that the prosecutor has not demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant’s will was not overborne.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.
Order reversed, etc.
