In re Lamar P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Lamar P.

255 A.D.2d 150, 682 N.Y.S.2d 127, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11746

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

DecidedNovember 10, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D.2d 150 (In re Lamar P.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Lamar P., 255 A.D.2d 150, 682 N.Y.S.2d 127, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11746 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Susan Larabee, J.), entered on or about January 28, 1998, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute one count of assault in the first degree, two counts of assault in the second degree, one count of assault in the third degree, one count of menacing in the second degree, and one count of menacing in the third degree, and placed him [151]*151with the Division for Youth for a period of 18 months and directed him to perform 100 hours of community service, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied appellant’s motion to suppress identification testimony. The prompt hospital showup was not suggestive. Appellant did not establish that a police officer had told the complainant that he would be viewing the individuals that cut him (see also, People v Stafford, 215 AD2d 212, lv denied 86 NY2d 784). We have considered and rejected appellant’s remaining contentions concerning the suppression issue.

The court’s findings were based on legally sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence of appellant’s accessorial liability. Concur— Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Tom and Saxe, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Susan Larabee, J.), entered on or about January 28, 1998, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute one count of assault in the first degree, two counts of assault in the second degree, one count of assault in the third degree, one count of menacing in the second degree, and one count of menacing in the third degree, and placed him [151]*151with the Division for Youth for a period of 18 months and directed him to perform 100 hours of community service, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied appellant’s motion to suppress identification testimony. The prompt hospital showup was not suggestive. Appellant did not establish that a police officer had told the complainant that he would be viewing the individuals that cut him (see also, People v Stafford, 215 AD2d 212, lv denied 86 NY2d 784). We have considered and rejected appellant’s remaining contentions concerning the suppression issue.

The court’s findings were based on legally sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence of appellant’s accessorial liability. Concur— Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Tom and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 150, 682 N.Y.S.2d 127, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11746, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-lamar-p-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack