From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Beason

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 8, 1998
252 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

July 8, 1998

Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Maloy, J. — Robbery, 3rd Degree.

Present — Denman, P.J., Pine, Hayes, Pigott, Jr., and Balio, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of robbery in the third degree (Penal Law § 160.05) and petit larceny (Penal Law § 155.25) and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of incarceration of 2 to 4 years. The sole contention of defendant on appeal is that the photo array was unduly suggestive and that County Court thus erred in denying his motion to suppress identification testimony. We disagree. We have reviewed the photo array "and conclude that the individuals portrayed therein resemble each other sufficiently so that there was not a substantial likelihood that the defendant would be singled out for identification" ( People v. Chipp, 75 N.Y.2d 327, 336, cert denied 498 U.S. 833).


Summaries of

People v. Beason

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 8, 1998
252 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Beason

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TYRONE BEASON…

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

Date published: Jul 8, 1998

Citations

252 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
674 N.Y.S.2d 596

Citing Cases

People v. Quaresimo

The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress identification testimony. Contrary to defendant's…

People v. Perry

We also reject defendant's contention that the photo arrays were unduly suggestive. There is no evidence that…