People v. Dailey
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant’s contention that the photo arrays from which a number of witnesses selected his picture were unduly suggestive is without merit. There were no characteristics of the defendant’s picture that made it stand out in any way from the others in the arrays so as to draw a viewer’s attention to it and indicate that the police had “made a particular selection” (People v Curtis, 71 AD3d 1044, 1045 [2010]; see People v Ferguson, 55 AD3d 926 [2008]; People v Wright, 297 AD2d 391 [2002]). Accordingly, the hearing court properly denied suppression of identification testimony.
*580Contrary to the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
- People v. HernandezNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- People v. DanielsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. LoucksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- People v. MutterperlAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. GonzalesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- In re Wallace P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- In re Wallace P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.