People v. Safford
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant’s contention that the police did not have a reasonable suspicion to stop and detain him for a showup identification is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL. 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10). In any event, the defendant partially matched the description of one of the perpetrators furnished by the complainants, and the showup identification was justified by its spatial and temporal proximity to the crime and was not unduly suggestive (see People v Duuvon, 77 NY2d 541, 544; People v Herrell, 278 AD2d 339, 340).
The manner in which the defendant was stopped and detained…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- People v. GrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- People v. RosarioNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
- People v. DuuvonNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- People v. MartinezNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- People v. AllenNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. CrumbleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. NunezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. HillAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. DiggsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- People v. JamesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.