People v. MertensPeople v. Mertens
Aрpeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Clyne, J.), rendered September 23, 1982, upon a vеrdict convicting defendant of the crime of sodomy in the first degree. Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of first degree sodomy based upon an incident wherein he was found to have sodomized a 10-year-old boy who had been entrusted to his care. Included in the evidenсe on behalf of the People were oral and written incriminating statements given by defendant to the police. On this appeal, defendant argues (1) that the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress the statements, (2) that he was deprived of a fair trial by the proseсutor’s violation of the trial court’s Sandoval ruling, (3) that his testimony was improperly curtailed, and (4) that he was dеprived of a fair trial by the court’s refusal to adjourn the trial until two of his witnesses could apрear. Based on a statement given by the victim, two police officers went to defendant’s home, identified themselves as police officers, and asked him to accompany them to the police station. Defendant agreed to do so. The police officers testified that defendant was advised of his Miranda rights, although defendant denied this. After initially denying involvement in the incident, defendant gave an oral and written confession. He now claims that he was plаced under arrest at his home and that such arrest was unsupported by probable cause. However, the record of the suppression hearing does not support defendant’s contention that he was placed in custody. He was asked to voluntarily accompany the police officers to the station and he agreed. He was not restrained or рhysically put into the police car. We conclude that “a reasonable man, innocent of any wrongdoing” in defendant’s position would not have thought that he was in custody (see Matter of Kwok T.,