From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Minter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 7, 1992
186 A.D.2d 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

October 7, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Balio, Lawton, Fallon and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant's contention that the showup conducted by police was impermissibly suggestive. The showup occurred within 20 to 25 minutes of the robbery following defendant's apprehension within 150 to 200 yards of the crime scene. Where, as here, the showup is made in proximity to the time and place where the crime occurred, it is an acceptable means of securing a suspect's identification (see, People v Brnja, 50 N.Y.2d 366, 372; People v Jordan, 178 A.D.2d 1009, 1010, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 920; People v Everett, 147 A.D.2d 896, 897). In such circumstances, a showup is tolerable in the interest of prompt identification (People v Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023, 1024). The hearing court's finding that the showup was not suggestive is supported by the record (People v Plantz, 161 A.D.2d 1115, 1116, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 863; People v Jones, 149 A.D.2d 970, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 742; People v Shippens, 136 A.D.2d 944, lv denied 71 N.Y.2d 1033).


Summaries of

People v. Minter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 7, 1992
186 A.D.2d 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Minter

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TERRY MINTER, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 7, 1992

Citations

186 A.D.2d 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
588 N.Y.S.2d 477

Citing Cases

People v. Rupert

The showup occurred within minutes after the two officers arrived at the scene of the burglary and observed…

People v. Hunt

We reduce defendant's conviction to the crime of robbery in the third degree, pursuant to the provisions of…