People v. Perez
This text of 539 N.E.2d 1104 (People v. Perez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant had no right to file a supplemental pro se brief in the Appellate Division and under the circumstances presented we find no abuse of discretion by the court in denying him permission to do so (see, People v White, 73 NY2d 468 [decided herewith]). In affirming, however, we note that the police identification of defendant from a mug shot several weeks later, based upon observation of him at the time of the crime, could not be considered a proper confirmatory identification (see, People v Riley, 70 NY2d 523). Inasmuch as the Appellate Division found on sufficient evidence that the officer also had an independent basis for his identification, the error does not require reversal.
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.
[639]*639Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
539 N.E.2d 1104, 74 N.Y.2d 637, 541 N.Y.S.2d 976, 1989 N.Y. LEXIS 477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-perez-ny-1989.