From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Alleyne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 11, 1988
136 A.D.2d 552 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

January 11, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bianchi, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The evidence adduced at trial, when viewed in a light most favorable to the People, was legally sufficient to support the defendant's conviction (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the evidence established the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15).

The defendant further argues that his initial detention was unlawful, and that his ensuing arrest was not based on probable cause. We disagree. The victim had ample time to identify his assailants during the initial attack. In addition, while perusing the nearby area in a police car shortly after the crime, the victim saw 2 men, 1 of whom was wearing a tan jogging suit, and identified them as the perpetrators. A radio description was sent out, and two men, fitting the victim's description, were detained nearby by other police officers, several minutes later. Under these circumstances, the detention of the defendant and his companion was lawful, since it was supported by a reasonable suspicion that they had just engaged in criminality (see, People v Hicks, 68 N.Y.2d 234; People v John BB., 56 N.Y.2d 482; People v De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210; People v Cantor, 36 N.Y.2d 106; People v Finlayson, 76 A.D.2d 670, cert denied 450 U.S. 931). Further, the on-the-scene showup identification of the defendant was lawful, since the identification was made shortly after the robbery (see, People v Blake, 35 N.Y.2d 331; People v Holly, 106 A.D.2d 403; People v Veal, 106 A.D.2d 418). Accordingly, the ensuing arrest, which was based on the victim's positive identification, was supported by probable cause (see, People v Carrasquillo, 54 N.Y.2d 248; People v De Bour, supra).

We have reviewed the remaining alleged errors urged by the defendant as grounds for reversal, and find them to be either without merit or harmless under the circumstances. Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Bracken and Weinstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Alleyne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 11, 1988
136 A.D.2d 552 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Alleyne

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES ALLEYNE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 11, 1988

Citations

136 A.D.2d 552 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

People v. Yonis

We find that the defendant's initial detention was supported by reasonable suspicion founded on articulable…

People v. Palmer

On the issue of identification, we note that as a general rule, the practice of exhibiting a suspect to a…