From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Kennerly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 3, 1986
117 A.D.2d 624 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

February 3, 1986

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


Judgment affirmed, and matter remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

Under the circumstances of this case, where defendant, who exactly matched the description of the burglar, was apprehended a very short distance from the crime scene only minutes after the crime, the police acted properly in arranging a prompt on-the-scene showup (see, e.g., People v. Brnja, 70 A.D.2d 17, affd 50 N.Y.2d 366; People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023; People v Soto, 87 A.D.2d 618). Nor can it be said that the showup in the instant case was unduly suggestive, where the hearing court determined that defendant was brought to the scene in an unmarked car, was not handcuffed, and was immediately identified without any prompting or other improper comments from the officers to the complainant, and these findings are amply supported by the evidence.

We have considered defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Lazer, J.P., Mangano, Brown and Kooper, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Kennerly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 3, 1986
117 A.D.2d 624 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. Kennerly

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MAURICE KENNERLY…

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

Date published: Feb 3, 1986

Citations

117 A.D.2d 624 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

People v. White

on court made no determination with respect to probable cause or whether there existed an independent basis…

People v. Wade

The hearing court also properly denied that branch of defendant's motion which was to suppress the…