Opinion
A89A0249.
DECIDED APRIL 3, 1989.
Armed robbery. Chatham Superior Court. Before Judge Head.
Linnie L. Darden III, for appellant.
Spencer Lawton, Jr., District Attorney, John I. Garcia, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
Appellant was tried before a jury and found guilty of armed robbery. He appeals from the judgment of conviction and sentence entered on the jury's guilty verdict.
1. Appellant enumerates as error the admission of evidence concerning his pre-trial identification. Appellant was apprehended within minutes after the armed robbery had been committed. He was then taken to the scene of the crime and identified in a one-man showup. "[U]nder the exigencies of the circumstances of this case, we do not find the showup [to be] unnecessarily suggestive. The showup was an on-the-scene confrontation conducted as soon as possible after the offense. It was an immediate product of the offense and [appellant's] apprehension. Practicalities inherent in this type of situation suggest that an immediate on-the-scene confrontation between victims and suspects is essential both to law enforcement and to fairness toward innocent suspects. [Cit.]" Horton v. State, 163 Ga. App. 809, 810 (1) ( 295 S.E.2d 554) (1982). Evidence as to this pre-trial identification of appellant was not erroneously admitted. See generally Arnold v. State, 155 Ga. App. 782 (1) ( 272 S.E.2d 751) (1980).
2. Since the pre-trial identification of appellant was untainted, it follows that the in-court identification of appellant was admissible. See Smith v. State, 189 Ga. App. 244, 245 (2) ( 375 S.E.2d 496) (1988).
3. Appellant enumerates the general grounds. After review, we find more than sufficient evidence from which a rational trior of fact could reasonably have found proof of appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560) (1979).
Judgment affirmed. McMurray, P. J., and Beasley, J., concur.