People v. Andrades
New York Court of Appeals
828 N.E.2d 599 (2005)
- Written by Paul Neel, JD
Facts
Derek Andrades (defendant) maintained a sexual relationship with Magalie Nieves. Andrades learned the Nieves was infected with HIV. Andrades and Ericka Cruz lured Nieves to a secluded area to confront her and a fight started, during which Andrades and Cruz stabbed Nieves to death. Police arrested Cruz, who confessed to the killing. Police then arrested Andrades, who gave written and video confessions. The state charged Andrades with second-degree murder and first-degree manslaughter. Andrades moved to suppress his confessions. Before the suppression hearing, Andrades’s attorney requested to withdraw as counsel, alleging an ethical conflict with his continued representation of Andrades. The trial court denied the request. During the hearing, Andrades’s attorney reasserted the ethical conflict on the record and outside of Andrades’s presence, informing the trial court that Andrades intended to testify and that Andrades’s testimony would be presented in narrative form. Andrades testified that he did not remember the events resulting in Nieves’s death, the written confession he had signed was untrue, his video confession had merely adopted Cruz’s version of events, and these confessions did not reflect his memory of what happened. The trial court denied Andrades’s suppression motion. A jury convicted Andrades of second-degree murder. Andrades appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Smith, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.