People v. James
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
In view of the Appellate Division’s conclusion, not challenged by the People on this appeal, that the victim’s testimony as to his identification of the defendant at the precinct should have been suppressed, the in-court identification by the victim was also improperly admitted as there was no evidence at the suppression hearing of an independent source for it. The Appellate Division properly noted that it may not make its own finding of an independent source based upon trial testimony (see, People v Dodt,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. DodtNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. GonzalezNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
3Cited by74 opinions
- People v. RileyNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- People v. MillanNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- People v. BurtsNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- People v. GethersNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- People v. LopezNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.