From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Irick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 1997
243 A.D.2d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

October 20, 1997

Appeal from Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.).


The hearing court properly refused to suppress the identification testimony. The police officers who conducted the lineup made several calls to the defendant's attorney before proceeding with the lineup. Under these circumstances, the defendant was not denied the right to counsel when the police proceeded in the attorney's absence ( see, People v. McRae, 195 A.D.2d 180, 187-188; People v. Riley, 158 A.D.2d 559).

The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05) and, in any event, without merit.

Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Copertino and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Irick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 1997
243 A.D.2d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Irick

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WILBER IRICK

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

Date published: Oct 20, 1997

Citations

243 A.D.2d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
663 N.Y.S.2d 246

Citing Cases

People v. Nunez

Under those circumstances, unlike the present circumstances, the police were entitled to conduct the lineup…

People v. Moore

The police officer who conducted the lineup made several calls to the defendant's attorney before proceeding…