From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Love

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 11, 1982
57 N.Y.2d 1023 (N.Y. 1982)

Summary

finding bolstering claim unpreserved

Summary of this case from Torres v. Racette

Opinion

Argued October 11, 1982

Decided November 11, 1982

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, DENNIS EDWARDS, JR., J.

Darren O'Connor and William E. Hellerstein for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney ( Stanley K. Shapiro and Donald J. Siewert of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

To the extent that defendant seeks to argue that the showup was not necessary because Officer Phillips had himself identified defendant, the point has not been preserved for our review. Moreover, though the better practice when feasible is not to conduct a showup before a group of witnesses ( People v Adams, 53 N.Y.2d 241, 249), procedures that are less than ideal may, as Adams held, be tolerable in the interest of prompt identification. This is particularly so in a case such as the present, in view of the proximity of the apprehension of defendant in time and space (five minutes and one block, cf. People v Brnja, 50 N.Y.2d 366) to the scene of the crime. Nor was there any allegation that the conduct of the police was in any way impermissibly suggestive.

Defendant's second claim of error, bolstering contrary to People v Trowbridge ( 305 N.Y. 471), was not preserved, the objection stated having been no more than the one word "objection" ( People v West, 56 N.Y.2d 662).

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur.

Order affirmed in memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Love

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 11, 1982
57 N.Y.2d 1023 (N.Y. 1982)

finding bolstering claim unpreserved

Summary of this case from Torres v. Racette
Case details for

People v. Love

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WILLIAM LOVE, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 11, 1982

Citations

57 N.Y.2d 1023 (N.Y. 1982)
457 N.Y.S.2d 474
443 N.E.2d 948

Citing Cases

People v. Marmo

Showup identifications are, by their very nature, suggestive and are strongly disfavored ( Riley, 70 N.Y.2d…

People v. Mitchell

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, and that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was…