Opinion
October 7, 1992
Appeal from the Erie County Court, D'Amico, J.
Present — Boomer, J.P., Green, Balio, Fallon and Davis, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to defendant's contentions that he was denied due process by the court's failure to consider a certain pre-trial identification of defendant during a Wade hearing and the People's failure to produce civilian witnesses, who may have provided information that might have influenced the witness' identification of defendant. The robbery victim's observation of defendant at a nightclub more than a month after the event was happenstance and not a police-arranged procedure, and her identification of defendant to police minutes later was confirmatory in nature. Neither identification came within the scope of United States v Wade ( 388 U.S. 218) or CPL 710.30 (see, People v Whisby, 48 N.Y.2d 834; People v Knight, 156 A.D.2d 588, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 920; People v Green, 149 A.D.2d 919, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 810). The People were not obliged to produce witnesses who may have provided information to the victim regarding the identity of defendant nor were the People obliged to elicit testimony from the victim. Such testimony would not have been relevant on the issue of suggestiveness of police procedures (see, People v Myrick, 66 N.Y.2d 903; People v Irick, 145 A.D.2d 507, lv denied 73 N.Y.2d 978). Also without merit is defendant's contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel.