People v. Daniels

1 Citing case

  1. People v. Whitney

    149 A.D.2d 748 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)   Cited 3 times

    In the instant case, the relevant portion of the defendant's moving papers alleged that the complainant's identification testimony was tainted by an unduly suggestive pretrial procedure because the complainant was permitted to view him in a hospital emergency room where the complainant was being treated for injuries suffered in the assault charged and at the time of the viewing the defendant was handcuffed and surrounded by police officers. We conclude that the alleged facts, if true, might establish improper police conduct and were sufficient to warrant a hearing (see, People v. Daniels, 139 A.D.2d 478; People v Martin, 135 A.D.2d 355, 356). One-on-one showups which are proximate in time and place to the arrest of a suspect are permissible in the interest of prompt identification (see, People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023, 1024; People v. Adams, 53 N.Y.2d 241, 249; People v. Burns, 133 A.D.2d 642, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 873).