Legal Opinion

People v. Hunt

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

Decided February 13, 1990PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant argues that his trial counsel’s failure to request a Wade hearing deprived him of his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel. However, an officer’s confirmatory viewing is not a police-arranged identification procedure. Therefore, no Wade hearing is required (see, People v Morales, 37 NY2d 262; People v Leacraft, 128 AD2d 640). Moreover, since the police officer observed the defendant while engaged in a face-to-face sales transaction with him, she had an independent basis for her in-court identification (see, People v Williams, 87 AD2d 876, 877). Nor can it…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. People v. . GaimariNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
  3. People v. GarafoloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1974
  4. People v. SatterfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. People v. MoralesNew York Court of Appeals · 1975

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. KimbellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API