In the middle of a bustling Time Square, Savion Robinson was handcuffed, surrounded by NYPD officers, and questioned for 30 minutes about why he attacked a man, how the fight started, and why he didn't seek NYPD assistance. Mr. Robinson confessed to the assault and made other incriminating statements. He was never given a Miranda warning. His attorney tried to suppress the statements, but failed because of People v. Huffman, 41 N.Y.2d 29 (1976), a 48-year-old case stymying the commands of Miranda in New York.  

Josh A. Roth, Winston & Strawn. Courtesy Photo

Huffman is New York's idiosyncratic interpretation of the Supreme Court's precedent on custodial interrogations. It permits the introduction of custodial statements obtained by police through questions that will elicit an incriminating response, despite the absence of a Miranda warning. The case does so by purporting to distinguish between "investigatory" and "interrogatory" questioning.