From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Camacho

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 22, 1994
207 A.D.2d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

September 22, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.).


The officers had reasonable suspicion to briefly detain defendants for a showup identification by the complainant (see, People v. Hicks, 68 N.Y.2d 234), where defendants matched the description of two armed robbery suspects, and were found sitting in a car similar to the one in which the suspects reportedly had fled within three blocks of the crime scene and only minutes after the event (see, People v. Cook, 179 A.D.2d 572). A discrepancy in the police testimony over whether the complainant's identification of defendants was spontaneous or prompted by an officer's question whether "these [are] the two guys that robbed you" did not require that the complainant be produced at the suppression hearing, since, even if we were to resolve the discrepancy in defendants' favor, we would find that the showup was not unduly suggestive (see, People v. Lawhorn, 199 A.D.2d 123, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 855).

We have considered defendants' other arguments and find them to be either without merit or unpreserved for review as a matter of law.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Ellerin, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Camacho

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 22, 1994
207 A.D.2d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Camacho

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RAYMOND CAMACHO…

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

Date published: Sep 22, 1994

Citations

207 A.D.2d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
616 N.Y.S.2d 954

Citing Cases

People v. Glover

To the contrary, given that defendant and Carney did not fit the particularized description provided by the…