The People of the State of New York, Appellant v. Francis J. Burdo, Respondent

Summary

The Court affirmed the Appellate Division, holding that the custodial interrogation of the defendant while he was represented on a pending rape charge violated the rule articulated in People v. Rogers, requiring suppression of his oral and written statements. The majority relied on Rogers and its progeny to conclude that once counsel is attached, interrogation on any matter must cease absent counsel. A dissent argued that the Rogers rule should apply only when an actual attorney‑client relationship or an invocation of the right to counsel is shown.