People v. Gonzales

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gonzales

52 A.D.2d 789, 383 N.Y.S.2d 332, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12577

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

DecidedMay 13, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.2d 789 (People v. Gonzales) 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. Gonzales, 52 A.D.2d 789, 383 N.Y.S.2d 332, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12577 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered January 9, 1975, convicting the defendant upon a jury verdict of robbery in the first degree and sentencing him as a second felony offender to a term of from 4½ to 9 years, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the indictment dismissed. This matter is foreclosed by the opinion of this court in the appeal of the appellant’s codefendant, People v Marrero (51 AD2d 513), in which this court acknowledged the impropriety of the show-up. Whereas in that case it was concluded that there was sufficient independent basis to support the in-court identification of the defendant Marrero, we find that in this case the victim was not in a position to observe this defendant and, therefore, the show-up being improper, the in-court identification was thereby tainted (see Stovall v Denno, 388 US 293, 301-302), and cannot be otherwise resurrected. (United States v Wade, 388 US 218.) Concur—Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Lupiano, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered January 9, 1975, convicting the defendant upon a jury verdict of robbery in the first degree and sentencing him as a second felony offender to a term of from 4½ to 9 years, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the indictment dismissed. This matter is foreclosed by the opinion of this court in the appeal of the appellant’s codefendant, People v Marrero (51 AD2d 513), in which this court acknowledged the impropriety of the show-up. Whereas in that case it was concluded that there was sufficient independent basis to support the in-court identification of the defendant Marrero, we find that in this case the victim was not in a position to observe this defendant and, therefore, the show-up being improper, the in-court identification was thereby tainted (see Stovall v Denno, 388 US 293, 301-302), and cannot be otherwise resurrected. (United States v Wade, 388 US 218.) Concur—Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Lupiano, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 789, 383 N.Y.S.2d 332, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12577, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gonzales-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack