People v. Dingle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dingle

137 A.D.2d 553, 523 N.Y.S.2d 983, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 715

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Dingle. Read the opinion of the Court — 122 A.D.2d 280 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 1, 1988·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Santagata, J.), rendered November 30, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts) and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We agree with the hearing court’s conclusions that there was neither suggestiveness nor illegality in any of the identification procedures conducted by police detectives. Suppression of such testimony was, therefore, properly denied (see, People v Pleasant, 54 NY2d 972, cert denied 455 US 924).

The defendant’s other contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either without merit or unpreserved for appellate review. Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Spatt 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 County Court, Nassau County (Santagata, J.), rendered November 30, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts) and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We agree with the hearing court’s conclusions that there was neither suggestiveness nor illegality in any of the identification procedures conducted by police detectives. Suppression of such testimony was, therefore, properly denied (see, People v Pleasant, 54 NY2d 972, cert denied 455 US 924).

The defendant’s other contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either without merit or unpreserved for appellate review. Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Spatt and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

People v. Dingle, 137 A.D.2d 553, 523 N.Y.S.2d 983, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 715 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

137 A.D.2d 553 (People v. Dingle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related