People v. Abrew
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s request to call the complainant to testify at the Wade hearing (see, People v Taylor, 80 NY2d 1, 15). The hearing evidence revealed no substantial constitutional question as to the suggestiveness of the lineup that would necessitate the complainant’s testimony (see, People v Chipp, 75 NY2d 327, 337-338, cert denied 498 US 833). Defendant argues that, prior to viewing the lineup, the complainant may have seen a “wanted” poster containing a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. ChippNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- People v. DodtNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
3Cited by88 opinions
- People v. BeauharnoisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- People v. RiceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. OttAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. WittmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.