Legal Opinion

People v. Aponte

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

Decided May 31, 1988PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant contends that the identification testimony at the trial should have been suppressed because the CPL 710.30 notice served by the People did not provide notice of all the identification testimony that the People intended to use at the trial (see, CPL 710.30). However, the defendant did not raise the issue at the Wade hearing, when the undercover officer fully testified with respect to the identification testimony which was later received in evidence at the trial, and the defendant failed to thereafter assert any protest at the trial based on the inadequacy of the statutory notice.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. GissendannerNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. People v. MoralesNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. People v. RiveraNew York Court of Appeals · 1981

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. DuffyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  2. People v. MorenoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
  3. People v. TurnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  4. People v. EstepAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  5. People v. FanfanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API