People v. Fallen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fallen

127 A.D.2d 786, 511 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43267

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 127 A.D.2d 786 (People v. Fallen) 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. Fallen, 127 A.D.2d 786, 511 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43267 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Patsalos, J.), rendered October 2, 1984, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Sufficient evidence was adduced at the defendant’s Wade hearing for the suppression court to determine that the identification procedure was not impermissibly suggestive and that there was an independent source for the identifying witness’s identification testimony. According the weight that we must to the findings of the hearing court, we decline to disturb its determination (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761; People v Krissick, 125 AD2d 415).

At trial, the evidence of the defendant’s guilt was substantial, and clearly proved his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We find no error in the court’s rulings with respect to the alibi-related witnesses, and conclude that references to possible involvement by the defendant in other criminal activity, while error, were harmless under the circumstances of this case. Brown, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Spatt, 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, Orange County (Patsalos, J.), rendered October 2, 1984, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Sufficient evidence was adduced at the defendant’s Wade hearing for the suppression court to determine that the identification procedure was not impermissibly suggestive and that there was an independent source for the identifying witness’s identification testimony. According the weight that we must to the findings of the hearing court, we decline to disturb its determination (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761; People v Krissick, 125 AD2d 415).

At trial, the evidence of the defendant’s guilt was substantial, and clearly proved his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We find no error in the court’s rulings with respect to the alibi-related witnesses, and conclude that references to possible involvement by the defendant in other criminal activity, while error, were harmless under the circumstances of this case. Brown, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 A.D.2d 786, 511 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43267, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fallen-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack