People v. Griffiths

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Griffiths

202 A.D.2d 1003, 609 N.Y.S.2d 486, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3373

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

DecidedMarch 11, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 202 A.D.2d 1003 (People v. Griffiths) 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. Griffiths, 202 A.D.2d 1003, 609 N.Y.S.2d 486, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3373 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant’s contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). The court did not err in refusing to permit defendant to call complainant as a witness at the Wade hearing (see, United States v Wade, 388 US 218). There is no absolute right to call an identifying witness at a Wade hearing and there were no "indicia of suggestiveness” presented to the hearing court that warranted such testimony (People v Chipp, 75 NY2d 327, 339, cert denied 498 US 833). We find defendant’s sentence neither harsh nor excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Doyle, Jr., J. — Criminal Possession Weapon, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Fallon, Callahan, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant’s contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). The court did not err in refusing to permit defendant to call complainant as a witness at the Wade hearing (see, United States v Wade, 388 US 218). There is no absolute right to call an identifying witness at a Wade hearing and there were no "indicia of suggestiveness” presented to the hearing court that warranted such testimony (People v Chipp, 75 NY2d 327, 339, cert denied 498 US 833). We find defendant’s sentence neither harsh nor excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Doyle, Jr., J. — Criminal Possession Weapon, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Fallon, Callahan, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 1003, 609 N.Y.S.2d 486, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-griffiths-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack