People v. Thomas
New York Court of Appeals
8 N.E.3d 308 (2014)
- Written by Paul Neel, JD
Facts
Wilhelmina Hicks and Adrian Thomas (defendant) found their four-month-old son, Matthew, unresponsive. Matthew was rushed to the hospital and diagnosed with head injuries from blunt-force trauma. Matthew died of his injuries. Matthew’s treating physician believed Matthew had been murdered. After Matthew’s death, while Wilhelmina was still at the hospital, police brought Adrian in for questioning. Police questioned Adrian for two hours before Adrian expressed suicidal ideation and was involuntarily hospitalized for 15 hours in a psychiatric unit. After Adrian’s release, police resumed questioning for another seven and a half hours. Police knew that the treating physician suspected Matthew was murdered but did not inform Adrian of Matthew’s death. Police repeatedly assured Adrian that Matthew’s injuries were an accident, that Adrian would not be arrested if he told the truth, and that any information Adrian shared would be relayed to Matthew’s doctors and could help save Matthew’s life. Police also threatened to remove Wilhelmina from the hospital for questioning if Adrian refused to relate what happened, after which Adrian stated that he would “take the fall.” One of the officers suggested in detail that Adrian had thrown Matthew down onto a low-lying mattress and instructed Adrian to show police what had occurred. Adrian acted out what the officer had suggested. The state (plaintiff) charged Adrian with murder. The trial court denied Adrian’s motion to suppress a video recording of his interrogation. Adrian was convicted and appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lippman, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 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.