People v. Baptiste

248 A.D.2d 479, 668 N.Y.S.2d 923, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2263
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 9, 1998·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered December 8, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[480]*480Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the “point-out” identification at issue was a witness-initiated procedure (see, People v Flores, 232 AD2d 654; People v Burgos, 219 AD2d 504; cf, People v Dixon, 85 NY2d 218). Thus, the People are not required to provide notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 that they intend to present evidence of the identification at trial (see, People v Burgos, supra).

The sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Baptiste, 248 A.D.2d 479, 668 N.Y.S.2d 923, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2263 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

248 A.D.2d 479 (People v. Baptiste) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

PeoplevCoker
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
People v. Coker
121 A.D.3d 1305 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Freeman
283 A.D.2d 518 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)