Opinion
January 23, 1975.
Pursuant to the requirements of G.L.c. 211A, § 9, the Reporter publishes the following:
The case was submitted on briefs.
Leonard Louison Jerry Benezra for the defendant.
James M. Quinn, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.
There was no error in denying the motion to suppress the victim's in-court identification of the defendant. There was "clear and convincing evidence" ( United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 240 [1967]) at the voir dire which supported (if it did not compel) the judge's findings that such identification would be based "solely" on the victim's actual observations of the defendant over a period of at least two hours during the night in question and that "[i]n no way was the [suppressed] police-station episode so impermissibly suggestive as to lead inevitably to irreparable mistaken in-court identification." Compare Commonwealth v. Hands, 2 Mass. App. Ct. 890 (1974).
Judgment affirmed.