People v. Plantz

161 A.D.2d 1115, 555 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9086
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 11, 1990·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The showup was permissible because the suspect was apprehended shortly after the report of the crime and was immediately viewed by the victim (see, People v Love, 57 NY2d 1023, 1024; People v Everett, 147 AD2d 896). The fact that defendant was in police custody when the showup was conducted does not invalidate the showup (see, People v Brnja, 50 NY2d 366). The victim’s identification at the showup was reliable because it was based on the suspect’s distinctive clothing and physical characteristics (see, People v Johnson, 137 AD2d 719; People v Meeks, 134 AD2d 290, lv denied 70 NY2d 958; People v Dennis, 125 AD2d 325, lv denied 70 NY2d 645). (Appeal from judgment of Jefferson County Court, Clary, J.—burglary, second degree.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Green, Lawton and Lowery, JJ.

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

People v. Plantz, 161 A.D.2d 1115, 555 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9086 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

161 A.D.2d 1115 (People v. Plantz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cohen v. Davis
926 F. Supp. 399 (S.D. New York, 1996)
People v. Minter
186 A.D.2d 1035 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Jordan
178 A.D.2d 1009 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
Piesco v. City of New York, Dept. of Personnel
753 F. Supp. 468 (S.D. New York, 1990)