People v. Brown

297 A.D.2d 748, 747 N.Y.2d 784, 747 N.Y.S.2d 784, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8663
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Brown. Read the opinion of the Court — 266 A.D.2d 838

Opinion

[749]*749The defendant’s contention that the prosecutor improperly attempted to bolster the victim’s identification testimony is not preserved for appellate review, since he failed to object to it specifically at trial (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Ortiz, 164 AD2d 872). In any event, the defendant’s claim is without merit. “Under CPL 60.30, a witness’s testimony as to identifications he or she made at prior court proceedings are admissible notwithstanding their bolstering effect on the witness’s testimony” (People v Rosario, 186 AD2d 598, 599; see also People v White, 73 NY2d 468, 473, cert denied sub nom. White v New York, 493 US 859; People v Saunders, 166 AD2d 546).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Florio, J.P., S. Miller, Crane and Mastro, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Brown, 297 A.D.2d 748, 747 N.Y.2d 784, 747 N.Y.S.2d 784, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8663 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

297 A.D.2d 748 (People v. Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. White
539 N.E.2d 577 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)
People v. Ortiz
164 A.D.2d 872 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Saunders
166 A.D.2d 546 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Rosario
186 A.D.2d 598 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
White v. New York
493 U.S. 859 (Supreme Court, 1989)