Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Boyer

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 28, 2006Published

1Dissent

R.S. Smith, J. (dissenting).

I dissent, because I think that requiring a Wade hearing in cases like this one, where the chance that the hearing will lead to the suppression of evidence is vanishingly small, is a waste of time and puts an unjustified burden on the criminal justice system.

The purpose of a Wade hearing is to decide whether a pretrial identification of the defendant violated the defendant’s constitutional rights and, if so, what the remedy should be (see United States v Wade, 388 US 218, 242 [1967]). In cases where a police officer who observed a crime identified the defendant…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. People v. RodriguezNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. People v. WhartonNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. State v. MedleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1974
  5. People v. StarrAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995

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

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

Powered by the Exa API