People v. Berkman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*591Initially, we find that the defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, cert denied 469 US 932). The accuracy of an eyewitness identification presents an issue of fact for the jury to resolve (People v Dukes, 97 AD2d 445). Here, the eyewitness to the robbery was unequivocal as to the defendant’s identity as one of the perpetrators. In addition, the People introduced into evidence a statement attributed to the defendant in which he admitted his participation in the robbery.
The hearing court properly declined to suppress inculpatory statements…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. MaliziaNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. LynesNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- People v. CefaroNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
- People v. DukesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- People v. . Dunbar Contracting Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. WalkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- People v. HornAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- People v. LegendreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- People v. NelsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- People v. CombsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.