People v. Daniels

139 A.D.2d 478, 527 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4519
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 28, 1988
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 139 A.D.2d 478 (People v. Daniels) 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. Daniels, 139 A.D.2d 478, 527 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4519 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

— Appeal from the judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Harold J. Rothwax, J., on suppression motion; Myriam Altman, J., at suppression hearing; and Howard Bell, J., at trial and sentence), rendered May 7, 1985, which convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the second degree and sentenced him to two concurrent indeterminate terms of imprisonment of from 4 to 8 years, is held in abeyance, and the matter is remanded for a Wade hearing.

We hold this appeal in abeyance, so that this matter may be remanded for a Wade hearing. The Calendar Judge erred in summarily denying defendant’s motion to suppress the complainant’s identification testimony without a hearing. Defendant’s allegations in his motion papers, that he and two other suspects were jointly displayed to the complainant, handcuffed and surrounded by uniformed police officers, were sufficient to raise a question as to the propriety of the identification procedure and required that a hearing be held.

Although at the hearing on the motion to suppress physical evidence, Justice Altman, the presiding Judge, commented that defense counsel could elicit information about the identification procedure as well, the court eventually declined to make any rulings on the identification issue, concluding that "there just wasn’t a complete opportunity to discuss that issue.” We also decline to reach the merits of the other issues and instead remand for a prompt hearing. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Asch and Milonas, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Whitney
149 A.D.2d 748 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
139 A.D.2d 478, 527 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-daniels-nyappdiv-1988.