People v. Tindal
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Simons, J.
The issue in this rape case is the extent to which the exclusionary rule forecloses the use of evidence otherwise lawfully acquired by the police but obtained by them after defendant had been identified by the victim in an improper identification procedure. The hearing court believed the improper identification procedures tainted the after-acquired evidence and suppressed not only the victim’s identification of defendant but also defendant’s subsequent admissions and the physical evidence obtained from him, i.e., his clothing and samples of pubic hair.
Defendant…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Manson v. BrathwaiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- People v. MalphursAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- People v. SheirodAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- People v. HallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- People v. ChamberlainAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- People v. ThomasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.