People v. Stubbs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Stubbs

305 A.D.2d 1096, 759 N.Y.S.2d 718, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4879

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

DecidedMay 2, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 305 A.D.2d 1096 (People v. Stubbs) 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. Stubbs, 305 A.D.2d 1096, 759 N.Y.S.2d 718, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4879 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of Monroe County Court (Schwartz, J.), entered May 10, 2001, convicting defendant after a jury trial of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [1]). We reject defendant’s contention that County Court erred in refusing to conduct a Wade hearing. Civilian-initiated identification procedures do not require a Wade hearing (see People v Dixon, 85 NY2d 218, 222 [1995]; People v Harris, 288 AD2d 20 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 755 [2002]; People v Lewis, 258 AD2d 287, 288 [1999]; People v Rumph, 248 AD2d 142 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 860 [1998]). Here, the court had sufficient evidence before it, based on the testimony at the preliminary hearing, to determine as a matter of law that the identification procedure was initiated by the victim and that a Wade hearing therefore was not required (see Rumph, 248 AD2d at 142). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Pine, Hurlbutt, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of Monroe County Court (Schwartz, J.), entered May 10, 2001, convicting defendant after a jury trial of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [1]). We reject defendant’s contention that County Court erred in refusing to conduct a Wade hearing. Civilian-initiated identification procedures do not require a Wade hearing (see People v Dixon, 85 NY2d 218, 222 [1995]; People v Harris, 288 AD2d 20 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 755 [2002]; People v Lewis, 258 AD2d 287, 288 [1999]; People v Rumph, 248 AD2d 142 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 860 [1998]). Here, the court had sufficient evidence before it, based on the testimony at the preliminary hearing, to determine as a matter of law that the identification procedure was initiated by the victim and that a Wade hearing therefore was not required (see Rumph, 248 AD2d at 142). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Pine, Hurlbutt, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 1096, 759 N.Y.S.2d 718, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stubbs-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack