From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Fountaine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 14, 2004
8 A.D.3d 1107 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

KA 03-00242.

Decided June 14, 2004.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Patricia D. Marks, J.), rendered January 8, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of burglary in the first degree and menacing in the second degree.

EDWARD J. NOWAK, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (ERIC M. DOLAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL C. GREEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY A. GILLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Before: PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., GREEN, SCUDDER, KEHOE, AND HAYES, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Supreme Court (Kenneth R. Fisher, J.) properly denied defendant's motion to suppress identification testimony. Although the witness's identification of defendant from a photo array was improperly influenced by the presence of another person simultaneously viewing the array ( see People v. Fernandez, 82 A.D.2d 922, 923), the People established an independent basis for the in-court identification of defendant by that witness. The witness was familiar with defendant, having seen him in the neighborhood on numerous prior occasions ( see People v. Rodriguez, 177 A.D.2d 664, 665, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1006; People v. Pittman, 159 A.D.2d 594, 595, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 794; People v. Kolomick, 132 A.D.2d 677, 678, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 875), and on the night of the robbery she observed him for several minutes from a short distance under good lighting conditions ( see People v. Martin, 305 A.D.2d 427, 427-428, lv denied 1 N.Y.3d 576). We reject the further contention of defendant that County Court (Patricia D. Marks, J.) illegally resentenced him to a term of 18 years after imposing a term of eight years. Upon recognizing that the sentencing minutes did not accurately reflect the sentence it intended to impose, the court properly exercised its inherent power to correct the error ( see People v. Minaya, 54 N.Y.2d 360, 364-365, cert denied 455 U.S. 1024). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.


Summaries of

People v. Fountaine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 14, 2004
8 A.D.3d 1107 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

People v. Fountaine

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. NORMAN WAYNE…

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

Date published: Jun 14, 2004

Citations

8 A.D.3d 1107 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
778 N.Y.S.2d 249

Citing Cases

People v. Young

evidence obtained by police at the time of the arrest contributed to defendant's conviction" ( People v.…

People v. Smith

Such a motion had little or no chance of success (see People v. Dark, 122 A.D.3d 1321, 1322, 996 N.Y.S.2d 830…