Opinion
2011-09-29
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,v.Travon WILLIAMS, Defendant–Appellant.
Richard M. Greenberg, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Lauren Stephens–Davidowitz of counsel), for appellant.Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (David P. Stromes of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert M. Stolz, J. at hearing; Lewis Bart Stone, J. at jury trial and sentencing), rendered November 6, 2008, convicting defendant of two counts each of robbery in the first and second degrees, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 11 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. The hearing evidence established that the police had reasonable suspicion to detain defendant for a showup identification, based on a radioed description that was sufficiently specific given the close spatial and temporal factors ( see e.g. People v. Johnson, 63 A.D.3d 518, 881 N.Y.S.2d 81 [2009], lv. denied 13 N.Y.3d 797, 887 N.Y.S.2d 546, 916 N.E.2d 441 [2009] ). While there was no specific testimony as to the source of the information for the radio call, circumstances support the inference that one or both of the victims provided the description ( see People v. Daniels, 6 A.D.3d 245, 246, 776 N.Y.S.2d 10 [2004], lv. denied 3 N.Y.3d 658, 782 N.Y.S.2d 700, 816 N.E.2d 573 [2004] ).
The prompt showup identification, conducted near the scene of the crime, was not unduly suggestive. The manner in which the showup was conducted was justified by the exigencies of the case and the interest of prompt identification ( see People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023, 1024, 457 N.Y.S.2d 474, 443 N.E.2d 948 [1982] ). There is no evidence that, in making their identifications, the victims were influenced by each other or by other persons on the street.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
Defendant's remaining claims are either identical or substantially similar to arguments this Court rejected on a codefendant's appeal ( People v. Banks, 66 A.D.3d 485, 887 N.Y.S.2d 41 [2009], lv. denied 13 N.Y.3d 905, 895 N.Y.S.2d 319, 922 N.E.2d 908 [2009] ), and there is no basis to reach a different result.
TOM, J.P., CATTERSON, RENWICK, FREEDMAN, MANZANET–DANIELS, JJ., concur.