People v. Joseph

191 A.D.2d 646, 595 N.Y.S.2d 116
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 22, 1993·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Savarese, J.), rendered July 16, 1990, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the lineup identification was unduly suggestive because he was the heaviest of the participants. We find that, viewing the totality of the circumstances surrounding the lineup identification, and considering that all of the participants were seated during the viewing which effectively concealed any weight disparity, the lineup was not impermissibly suggestive (see, People v Lundquist, 151 AD2d 505; People v Jackson, 151 AD2d 694).

We find no merit to the defendant’s remaining contention. Mangano, P. J., Sullivan, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Joseph, 191 A.D.2d 646, 595 N.Y.S.2d 116 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

191 A.D.2d 646 (People v. Joseph) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Wallace
261 A.D.2d 493 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
People v. Shaw
251 A.D.2d 686 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
People v. Hoehne
203 A.D.2d 480 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)