Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Waring

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 18, 1992Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRitter, J.

I agree that the circumstances underlying each of the photographic viewings in this case were highly suggestive. There may be a legitimate police purpose in having an undercover officer make a prompt photographic identification of a suspect in an ongoing investigation, prior to making any arrest, and preserving the photograph in the police file for future use. Here, however, the photographic viewing after the January 22, 1988 transaction occurred six days later, and, as was the case after each subsequent transaction, the identification suffered from all the forbidden attributes of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. RodriguezNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. People v. WhartonNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. People v. BurtsNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. People v. GordonNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. People v. WilliamsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API