People v. Mesisco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mesisco

150 A.D.2d 613, 543 N.Y.S.2d 267, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7037

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

DecidedMay 15, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 150 A.D.2d 613 (People v. Mesisco) 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. Mesisco, 150 A.D.2d 613, 543 N.Y.S.2d 267, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7037 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.), rendered November 14, 1983, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth 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 [614]*614suppress identification testimony and statements made by him to law enforcement authorities.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We further find that the identification testimony was properly admitted, as the identification procedure used was not unduly suggestive. In any event, the record fully supports the hearing court’s determination that an independent source for the identification existed.

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Kunzeman, J. P., Rubin, Spatt and Balletta, 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, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.), rendered November 14, 1983, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth 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 [614]*614suppress identification testimony and statements made by him to law enforcement authorities.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We further find that the identification testimony was properly admitted, as the identification procedure used was not unduly suggestive. In any event, the record fully supports the hearing court’s determination that an independent source for the identification existed.

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Kunzeman, J. P., Rubin, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 A.D.2d 613, 543 N.Y.S.2d 267, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7037, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mesisco-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack