People v. Rudge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rudge

76 A.D.2d 891, 428 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11980

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

DecidedJune 16, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 76 A.D.2d 891 (People v. Rudge) 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. Rudge, 76 A.D.2d 891, 428 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11980 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, rendered June 7, 1978, convicting him of robbery in the third degree upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Although the defendant now asserts that his waiver of the presence of counsel at his prearraignment lineup could not have been effective in the absence of counsel, we find it unnecessary to reach the question. If there was any error in the admission of testimony concerning the lineup identification (to which no objection was made), it was rendered harmless beyond a reasonable doubt by the strong independent basis for the in-court identification by the victim and the fact that the lineup itself was not suggestive. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, rendered June 7, 1978, convicting him of robbery in the third degree upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Although the defendant now asserts that his waiver of the presence of counsel at his prearraignment lineup could not have been effective in the absence of counsel, we find it unnecessary to reach the question. If there was any error in the admission of testimony concerning the lineup identification (to which no objection was made), it was rendered harmless beyond a reasonable doubt by the strong independent basis for the in-court identification by the victim and the fact that the lineup itself was not suggestive. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 A.D.2d 891, 428 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11980, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rudge-nyappdiv-1980.