Legal Opinion

People v. Thomas

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

Decided March 11, 1996PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The People wholly failed to satisfy their burden of establishing that the identification procedure by which the victims of the subject robbery identified the defendant was merely confirmatory in nature (see, People v Rodriguez, 79 NY2d 445, 452; People v Cinatus, 188 AD2d 481). Therefore, under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court erred in summarily denying the defendant’s motion to suppress the victim’s identification testimony (see, CPL 710.60). However, since no determination has been made that the police employed an unduly suggestive identification procedure, the appeal may…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. RodriguezNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. People v. BryanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  3. People v. CinatusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  4. People v. HarewoodAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. CarmonaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
  2. People v. ReddingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
  3. People v. ThomasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API