From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Williams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 15, 1986
122 A.D.2d 901 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

August 15, 1986

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Delin, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

The hearing court did not err in concluding that the police officer was justified in asking the defendant to produce his license after the defendant had voluntarily stopped to ask the officer for directions, where the defendant matched the description of the perpetrator given by the victim to the officer the day before, the defendant bore an "amazing similarity" to the composite sketch of the perpetrator which the officer had with him at the time, and the defendant was driving down the same block where the incident occurred (see, People v Sobotker, 43 N.Y.2d 559; People v De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210). The evidence adduced at the hearing established that the victim's in-court identification of the defendant was the product of her independent recollection. Thus preclusion of the in-court identification would not have been required even if the antecedent detention, during which a photograph of the defendant was taken which was used in an array, was unlawful (People v Pleasant, 54 N.Y.2d 972, cert denied 455 U.S. 924; People v Armstrong, 110 A.D.2d 773; People v Ennis, 107 A.D.2d 707).

After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and assuming that the jury credited the prosecution witnesses and gave the prosecution's evidence the full weight that might reasonably be accorded it (see, People v Bigelow, 106 A.D.2d 448), a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt (People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620).

Furthermore, the defendant was not denied due process of law when the court denied his motion to be provided with a free transcript of the suppression hearing, where he failed to submit an affidavit attesting to his indigency (see, People v Montgomery, 18 N.Y.2d 993; People v Brown, 114 A.D.2d 855).

We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Lazer, J.P., Mangano, Brown and Niehoff, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Williams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 15, 1986
122 A.D.2d 901 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARVIN WILLIAMS…

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

Date published: Aug 15, 1986

Citations

122 A.D.2d 901 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

People v. Lee

Identification materials bearing a defendant's likeness and prepared under police auspices are sufficient to…

People v. Lee

Identification materials bearing a defendant's likeness and prepared under police auspices are sufficient to…