People v. Boynton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Boynton

134 A.D.2d 506, 521 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50698

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

DecidedNovember 23, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 134 A.D.2d 506 (People v. Boynton) 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

People v. Boynton, 134 A.D.2d 506, 521 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50698 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Murray, J.), rendered January 17, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that he was deprived of a fair trial when the prosecutor showed his photograph to the complaining witnesses on the morning of the trial has not been preserved for appellate review. By failing to request a Wade hearing either before or during trial the defendant has waived his right to judicial review of the issue (CPL 710.60 [3]; 470.05 [2]; People v Ross, 21 NY2d 258; People v Gustafson, 110 AD2d 1055). In any event, the complainants’ testimony at trial established that an independent source existed for their in-court identification (see, Matter of Michael J., 117 AD2d 602; People v Williams, 87 AD2d 876; People v Tillman, 74 AD2d 911).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to without merit. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Murray, J.), rendered January 17, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that he was deprived of a fair trial when the prosecutor showed his photograph to the complaining witnesses on the morning of the trial has not been preserved for appellate review. By failing to request a Wade hearing either before or during trial the defendant has waived his right to judicial review of the issue (CPL 710.60 [3]; 470.05 [2]; People v Ross, 21 NY2d 258; People v Gustafson, 110 AD2d 1055). In any event, the complainants’ testimony at trial established that an independent source existed for their in-court identification (see, Matter of Michael J., 117 AD2d 602; People v Williams, 87 AD2d 876; People v Tillman, 74 AD2d 911).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to without merit. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

134 A.D.2d 506, 521 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-boynton-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack