Legal Opinion
People v. John
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 17, 2011PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The court properly declined to suppress identification testimony. The prompt showup was part of an unbroken chain of exigent events (see People v Serrano, 219 AD2d 508 [1995]). Immediately after the robbery, the identifying witness pointed out the car in which his assailants were fleeing. The police pursued the car, stopped it, arrested defendants, and conducted a showup.
The overall effect of the allegedly suggestive circumstances was not significantly greater than what is inherent in any showup (see People v Gatling, 38 AD3d 239, 240 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 865 [2007]). Even assuming that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. CrimminsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. PavaoNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. WalkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- People v. HayesNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
- People v. GatlingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- People v. ReedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. ReedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013