People v. Dickerson
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
That court affirmed defendant’s conviction agreeing with the suppression court that the complainant’s pretrial corporeal identification of defendant was not impermissibly suggestive and that there were independent bases for defendant’s in-court identification by both the complainant and the police officer. Each of these affirmed determinations is beyond the scope of our review unless it were to be concluded that it was erroneous as a matter of law. There was, however, no error of law in any of these…
2Cited by13 opinions
- People v. ChippNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- People v. MalloyNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. WhartonNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- People v. CollinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. GeeNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.