Legal Opinion

People v. Rodriguez

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

Decided May 31, 1988PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*724We find no basis to disturb the determination of the hearing court that neither the photographic nor lineup identification was the result of unduly suggestive procedures (see, People v Norris, 122 AD2d 82, lv denied 68 NY2d 916; People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759). In addition, the court properly found that the testimony adduced at the hearing established that the victim had an independent basis for the in-court identification based upon his close scrutiny of the defendant during the commission of the crime (see, People v Adams, 53 NY2d 241; People v Friday, 114 AD2d 970; People v Hall, 81 AD2d…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. AdamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. People v. NorrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  3. People v. HallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
  4. People v. GilmoreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  5. People v. HayesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. TafurAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  2. People v. AbduwaliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API