Opinion
April 16, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Steven Barrett, J.).
The hearing court properly declined to suppress evidence of the three showup identifications. These identifications occurred in close geographic and temporal proximity to the crime and, under the circumstances, the fact that defendant was identified while handcuffed, in the presence of uniformed officers, and while he had blood on him, did not render the identifications unduly suggestive ( see, People v. Blanche, 90 N.Y.2d 821; People v. Davis, 232 A.D.2d 154, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 941). The hearing court properly exercised its discretion in limiting cross-examination of the victim because the record demonstrates that defense counsel was able to ask the victim whether he had spoken to the other witness prior to identifying defendant near the ambulance and further questioning on that issue would have been repetitive ( see, People Bolling, 167 A.D.2d 346). We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Rubin, Williams, Tom and Saxe, JJ.