From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Webb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 11, 1990
161 A.D.2d 1147 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

May 11, 1990

Appeal from the Niagara County Court, DiFlorio, J.

Present — Dillon, P.J., Callahan, Denman, Balio and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of three counts of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15) arising from two separate armed robberies in downtown Niagara Falls. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion for a severance because the crimes charged were "the same or similar in law" (CPL 200.20 [c]; see, People v. Lane, 56 N.Y.2d 1; People v. Jenkins, 50 N.Y.2d 981; People v. Davis, 156 A.D.2d 969; People v. McDougald, 155 A.D.2d 867; People v. Mercer, 151 A.D.2d 1004, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 815).

At trial, a prosecution witness who had failed to identify defendant at a pretrial corporeal lineup improperly identified him in violation of CPL 60.30. It is clear from the record that the improper in-court identification was gratuitous and not elicited in response to the prosecutor's question. In view of the trial court's prompt curative instructions to the jury to disregard such testimony and the fact that another witness properly identified defendant, that error does not warrant reversal (see, People v. Berg, 59 N.Y.2d 294, 297, 299-300; People v. Evans, 136 A.D.2d 562, lv denied 71 N.Y.2d 1026).

We find no merit to defendant's remaining claims that he was deprived of a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct, that the trial court's instructions to the jury were improper, that a statement made at his booking should have been suppressed, or that he was deprived of a fair trial because he was not present at a preindictment hearing on an order to show cause why he should not appear in a lineup. With respect to the latter claim, there is no record of that hearing and thus it cannot be reviewed. In any event, it is clear that a suspect may be compelled to appear in a lineup (see, Matter of Abe A., 56 N.Y.2d 288, 291). There is likewise no merit to defendant's claims of error with respect to the court's evidentiary rulings.


Summaries of

People v. Webb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 11, 1990
161 A.D.2d 1147 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Webb

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TYRONE WEBB, Also…

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

Date published: May 11, 1990

Citations

161 A.D.2d 1147 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
555 N.Y.S.2d 507

Citing Cases

People v. Wilson

They have instead consented to submission of this matter for determination on the papers submitted, including…

Matter of Thomas

After stating that there is no explicit statutory authority for a court to so order, the Court held that such…