People v. Plantz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Plantz

161 A.D.2d 1115, 555 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9086

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

DecidedMay 11, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

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

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 A.D.2d 1115, 555 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9086, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-plantz-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack