People v. Settles, 46 N.Y.2d 154 (1978)

A defendant who is under indictment and in custody may not waive the right to counsel unless an attorney is present.

Summary

Settles was convicted of robbery. The key issue was whether a pre-arraignment lineup identification should have been excluded because Settles waived his right to counsel without counsel present after being indicted. The New York Court of Appeals reversed the conviction, holding that once an indictment is filed, a defendant in custody cannot waive the right to counsel unless counsel is present. This rule aims to protect the defendant’s rights during the accusatory phase, ensuring a buffer against the state’s power.

Facts

Two men robbed a bar, its manager, and a patron. Police responding to the scene engaged in a shootout with one of the robbers, who escaped. Police later found evidence at the apartment of the co-defendant’s common-law wife, including proceeds from the robbery, clothing worn by the perpetrators, and the gun used in the shooting. Both Boalds and Settles were present in the apartment. Boalds was arrested, and Settles was taken in for questioning and then released.

A grand jury indicted both Settles and Boalds on murder, robbery, and weapons charges. Settles was apprehended in Atlanta, Georgia, and returned to New York. Upon arrival, he was taken to a precinct for a lineup. He was given Miranda warnings and agreed to appear in the lineup without counsel. Two witnesses identified Settles as one of the robbers.

Procedural History

Settles and Boalds were jointly tried, and Settles was convicted of first-degree robbery and sentenced as a predicate felony offender. Settles appealed from the judgment of conviction. The Appellate Division affirmed. Settles then appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.

Issue(s)

Whether identifications made by witnesses at a post-indictment, pre-arraignment corporeal viewing of the then unrepresented defendant should have been excluded where defendant, in the absence of counsel, orally waived his right to have an attorney present at the lineup?

Holding

No, because a defendant in a postindictment, prearraignment custodial setting, even though not then represented by an attorney, may not in the absence of counsel waive the right to have counsel appear at a corporeal identification.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court of Appeals emphasized the importance of the right to counsel in New York, which has developed independently of its federal counterpart. Once an indictment is filed, the police function shifts from investigatory to accusatory. "At that point, there is no longer any inquiry into an unsolved crime and the suspect is now the accused." The court stated: "In a very real sense, the indictment represents a method of commencing formal judicial proceedings against the defendant…and it is at that point at which the assistance of counsel is indispensable." The Court reasoned that any delay in arraignment after indictment serves only to bolster the prosecution’s case. The court explicitly stated: "a criminal defendant under indictment and in custody may not waive his right to counsel unless he does so in the presence of an attorney." The court rejected the argument that the need for counsel is lessened at a corporeal viewing, stating that "assistance of counsel after indictment at a lineup is an indispensable correlative to a fair trial." The court emphasized that it refuses "to predicate a waiver of so valued a right on the recitation of a formula printed on a card." The court also addressed the admissibility of a statement by the co-defendant Boalds, finding that it may be admitted under certain circumstances as a declaration against penal interest if it contains sufficient indicia of reliability and trustworthiness.