People v. Ruiz
This text of 419 N.E.2d 343 (People v. Ruiz) 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.
Without more, in the circumstances revealed by this record we cannot say as a matter of law that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied the defendant’s request for a lineup made at a time when, some five months after the initial indentification, it is not disputed the defendant presented a somewhat altered appearance.
As to appellant’s contention that, despite an otherwise unobjectionable charge on the burden of proof, the Trial Judge should have granted the request that the jury be instructed on circumstantial evidence, as we have only recently reiterated, a special instruction on that subject is required only when the prosecution’s case rests on circumstantial evidence alone (People v Gerard, 50 NY2d 392; People v Barnes, 50 NY2d 375).
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
419 N.E.2d 343, 52 N.Y.2d 929, 437 N.Y.S.2d 665, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ruiz-ny-1981.