From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wilson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 2001
288 A.D.2d 331 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted October 19, 2001.

November 13, 2001.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered March 3, 1998, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification evidence.

Andrew C. Fine, New York, N.Y. (Désirée Sheridan of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Ann Bordley, and Elaine Block of counsel), for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contentions, after suppressing evidence of a belated on-the-scene showup, the Supreme Court properly determined that the prosecution established the existence of an independent basis for the complainant's in-court identification of the defendant (see, People v. Powell, 273 A.D.2d 483; People v. Hyatt, 162 A.D.2d 713). The complainant's Wade hearing (see, United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218) testimony established that she had a sufficiently prolonged, unobstructed view of the defendant both before and during the crime under good lighting conditions, and was able to describe him to police with sufficient specificity.

The defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence adduced at trial is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Wilson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 2001
288 A.D.2d 331 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. MAURICE WILSON, appellant

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

Date published: Nov 13, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 331 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
732 N.Y.S.2d 591