Legal Opinion

People v. Barnwell

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

Decided November 15, 1989PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow expert testimony regarding the deficiencies in eyewitness identification (see, People v Cronin, 60 NY2d 430, 433; People v Valentine, 53 AD2d 832; People v *887Schor, 135 Misc 2d 636). We have considered the claims raised by defendant in his supplementary brief and find that none requires reversal. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J. — rape, first degree, and other charges.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. CroninNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. People v. ValentineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  3. People v. SchorNassau County District Court · 1987

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. PittsNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
  2. People v. LeGrandNew York Supreme Court · 2002
  3. People v. DunlapAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  4. People v. MaddoxAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990