Legal Opinion
People v. Wright
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided August 26, 2002PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant argues that the photo array identification of him by a witness should have been suppressed on the ground that it was suggestive. Specifically, the defendant claims that he was visibly younger than the other men in the photo array.
A photographic display is suggestive where some characteristic of one picture draws the viewer’s attention to it, indicating that the police have made a particular selection (see People v Cherry, 150 AD2d 475; People v Dubois, 140 AD2d 619, 622). An examination of the eight-picture array employed in this case demonstrates that it was not suggestive. The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. SuitteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- People v. RobertAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. DuboisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- People v. FloydAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- People v. CherryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
3Cited by22 opinions
- People v. RagunauthAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- People v. CarterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. HewittAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. BrownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. CurtisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.