Legal Opinion

People v. Dread

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

Decided December 31, 1997PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in denying his suppression motion based upon an impermissibly suggestive photo array. We disagree. The photo array contains photographs of men with similar physical features (see, People v Burns, 186 AD2d 1015, 1016, lv denied 81 NY2d 837; see also, People v Gray, 186 AD2d 1058, lv denied 81 NY2d 840). Moreover, there is no “characteristic of one picture [that] draws the viewer’s attention to that picture, indicating that the police [were urging] a particular selection” (People v Emmons, 123 AD2d 475, 476,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People v. RodriguezNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. People v. EmmonsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  3. People v. RogersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  4. People v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
  5. People v. LeeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. AstutoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  2. People v. QuaresimoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API