People v. McDaniel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McDaniel

171 A.D.2d 460, 567 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3290

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

DecidedMarch 12, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 171 A.D.2d 460 (People v. McDaniel) 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. McDaniel, 171 A.D.2d 460, 567 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3290 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of Supreme Court, New York County (Donald J. Mark, J.), rendered November 28, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing defendant as a predicate felony offender to concur[461]*461rent indeterminate terms of imprisonment from 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant was arrested as a result of a face to face sale of narcotics to an undercover police officer which sale was consummated by the use of a co-defendant who acted as an intermediary. The arrest was made within five minutes after the undercover police officer transmitted in defendant’s description to his backup team, and the record does not support defendant’s contention that the confirmatory identification made by the undercover officer at the station house, within two hours after the arrest, was tainted by any suggestiveness which would require a hearing pursuant to United States v Wade (388 US 218). The identification made by the trained undercover professional in this case constitutes the type of confirmatory identification upheld without the necessity for a Wade hearing (People v Wharton, 74 NY2d 921; People v Stanton, 108 AD2d 688; cf., People v Gordon, 76 NY2d 595). Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Ross, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment of Supreme Court, New York County (Donald J. Mark, J.), rendered November 28, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing defendant as a predicate felony offender to concur[461]*461rent indeterminate terms of imprisonment from 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant was arrested as a result of a face to face sale of narcotics to an undercover police officer which sale was consummated by the use of a co-defendant who acted as an intermediary. The arrest was made within five minutes after the undercover police officer transmitted in defendant’s description to his backup team, and the record does not support defendant’s contention that the confirmatory identification made by the undercover officer at the station house, within two hours after the arrest, was tainted by any suggestiveness which would require a hearing pursuant to United States v Wade (388 US 218). The identification made by the trained undercover professional in this case constitutes the type of confirmatory identification upheld without the necessity for a Wade hearing (People v Wharton, 74 NY2d 921; People v Stanton, 108 AD2d 688; cf., People v Gordon, 76 NY2d 595). Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Ross, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 A.D.2d 460, 567 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mcdaniel-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack