People v. Walker
145 A.D.2d 937, 538 N.Y.S.2d 709, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13976
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Walker. Read the opinion of the Court — 116 A.D.2d 948 →
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 23, 1988·Published
Opinion
— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We agree with the hearing court that the complainant had ample opportunity to observe the defendant and thus had an independent basis for his identification, untainted by any suggestive identification at a showup (see, People v Ramos, 42 NY2d 834; People v Koberstein, 103 AD2d 1021, affd 66 NY2d 989). (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Celli, J. — robbery, second degree.) Present— Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Green, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Walker, 145 A.D.2d 937, 538 N.Y.S.2d 709, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13976 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).
145 A.D.2d 937 (People v. Walker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Koberstein
489 N.E.2d 1281 (New York Court of Appeals, 1985)
People v. Ramos
366 N.E.2d 76 (New York Court of Appeals, 1977)
People v. Koberstein
103 A.D.2d 1021 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)