People v. Barnes, 2000-06690.
| Decision Date | 09 February 2004 |
| Docket Number | 2000-06690. |
| Citation | 771 N.Y.S.2d 359,2004 NY Slip Op 00675,4 A.D.3d 433 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KAISEN BARNES, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The information provided by the robbery complainant gave the police reasonable suspicion to detain the defendant in order to conduct a prompt showup identification (see People v Sharpe, 259 AD2d 639 [1999]; People v Evans, 237 AD2d 458 [1997]). The fact that the police may have used handcuffs to detain the defendant for the purpose of the showup identification did not transform the detention into a full-blown arrest (see People v Allen, 73 NY2d 378 [1989]; People v Evans, supra at 459). In addition, the defendant's contention that the showup identification was unduly suggestive is without merit. Under the circumstances, the showup identification which was conducted in close spatial and temporal proximity to the offense was not unduly suggestive (see People v Duuvon, 77 NY2d 541, 543 [1991]; cf People v Ortiz, 90 NY2d 533, 537 [1997]).
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's Batson challenge (see Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79 [1986]) to the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges against African-American prospective jurors. The defendant failed to demonstrate that the race-neutral reasons advanced by the prosecutor were pretextual (see People v Hernandez, 75 NY2d 350 [1990], affd 500 US 352 [1991]; People v McCoy, 266 AD2d 589, 590-591 [1999]; People v Wint, 237 AD2d 195, 198 [1997]; see generally People v Richie, 217 AD2d 84, 89 [1995]).
The defendant's remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Jose T.
...the detention into a full-blown arrest (see People v. Allen, 73 N.Y.2d 378, 380, 540 N.Y.S.2d 971, 538 N.E.2d 323 ; People v. Barnes, 4 A.D.3d 433, 771 N.Y.S.2d 359 ; People v. Worthy, 308 A.D.2d 555, 764 N.Y.S.2d 833 ; People v. Moore, 296 A.D.2d 426, 745 N.Y.S.2d 542 ; People v. Evans, 23......
-
People v. McCarthy
...where necessary, for example, to ensure an individual's presence for a prompt showup identification (see e.g. People v. Barnes , 4 A.D.3d 433, 433, 771 N.Y.S.2d 359 [2004] ), even where, unlike the present case, the individual is thereafter transported in a police vehicle to a showup scene ......
-
People v. Gray
...v. Williams, 73 A.D.3d 1097, 1099, 905 N.Y.S.2d 185 ; People v. Santiago, 41 A.D.3d 1172, 1174, 839 N.Y.S.2d 369 ; People v. Barnes, 4 A.D.3d 433, 771 N.Y.S.2d 359 ). Contrary to the defendant's further pro se contention, his subsequent arrest was lawful. Moreover, the search of his pants, ......
-
People v. Smith
...N.Y.S.2d 971, 538 N.E.2d 323 (1989) ; see also In re Jose T. , 127 A.D.3d 875, 8 N.Y.S.3d 334 (2d Dept. 2015) ; People v. Barnes , 4 A.D.3d 433, 771 N.Y.S.2d 359 (2d Dept. 2004). Probable Cause Once the defendant was lawfully detained, the civilian witness's show up identification of him as......