People v. Ashe
This text of 297 A.D.2d 287 (People v. Ashe) 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.
Opinion
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record supports the hearing court’s conclusion that the complainant had an independent basis for identifying the defendant at trial. A witness may identify a perpetrator of a crime as part of his or her in-court testimony, notwithstanding the existence of a procedurally defective pretrial identification procedure, provided that the People establish by clear and convincing evidence that the in-court identification is based upon the witness’ independent observation of the defendant (see People v Thomas, 51 [288]*288NY2d 466; People v Hyatt, 162 AD2d 713). Here, the evidence shows that the defendant stood over the complainant and spoke to her, during which time the complainant had an unobstructed view of the defendant under good lighting conditions. These facts established her independent ability to identify the defendant; therefore, suppression of the in-court identification was properly denied. Santucci, J.P., Altman, S. Miller and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
297 A.D.2d 287, 746 N.Y.2d 38, 746 N.Y.S.2d 38, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ashe-nyappdiv-2002.