From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 29, 2001
283 A.D.2d 657 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Argued May 7, 2001

May 29, 2001.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.), rendered May 10, 1999, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Douglass, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Neil L. Fishman of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Anthea H. Bruffee of counsel), for respondent.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing court properly denied that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony. The lineup at which the defendant was identified was sufficiently attenuated in time from the prior photographic identification procedure to nullify any possible taint resulting from the photographic array (see, People v. Thomas, 161 A.D.2d 543; People v. Allah, 158 A.D.2d 605).

To the extent that additional issues may have been raised, they are unpreserved for appellate review.

O'BRIEN, J.P., ALTMAN, LUCIANO and ADAMS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 29, 2001
283 A.D.2d 657 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. MICHAEL JONES, appellant

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

Date published: May 29, 2001

Citations

283 A.D.2d 657 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
725 N.Y.S.2d 877

Citing Cases

Jones v. Ricks

The lineup at which the defendant was identified was sufficiently attenuated in time from the prior…