People v. Broadwater

• Decision Date: 07 November 1984
• Citation: 482 N.Y.S.2d 633,105 A.D.2d 1065
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Anthony BROADWATER, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 633

482 N.Y.S.2d 633

105 A.D.2d 1065

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Anthony BROADWATER, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

Fourth Department.

Nov. 7, 1984.

Gerald T. Barth by James Dungan, Syracuse, for appellant.

Richard A. Hennessy, Jr. by Michael Marmor, Syracuse, for respondent.

Before DILLON, P.J., and CALLAHAN, DOERR, DENMAN and O'DONNELL, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:

That the victim of this rape confused defendant with another person in the line-up affects only the weight to be accorded to two other identifications she made of defendant (see People v. McCullers, 40 A.D.2d 796, 797, 338 N.Y.S.2d 63, affd. 33 N.Y.2d 806, 350 N.Y.S.2d 904, 305 N.E.2d 914; see also, People v. Thomas, 66 A.D.2d 1001, 412 N.Y.S.2d 68). It is noted that the line-up participant whom the victim identified was included in the line-up at defendant's request and bore a remarkable resemblance to defendant. In reviewing the legal sufficiency in a criminal case, the test to be applied is "whether 'after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt' (Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 ) (People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932). We conclude that, on the record before us, this standard has been met.

We have considered defendant's other arguments and find no merit to them.

Judgment unanimously affirmed.