People v. Craddock
| Decision Date | 17 August 2017 |
| Docket Number | No. 9838–2016.,9838–2016. |
| Citation | 66 N.Y.S.3d 654 (Table) |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Brandon CRADDOCK, Defendant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Jamal Johnson, Esq., Nicholas Wiltsie, Esq., for the Defendant.
Daniel Costello, Esq., Colleen Babb, Esq., for the People.
Defendant is charged, by way of indictment, with the crimes of Robbery in the First Degree, in violation of Penal Law (P.L.) section 160.15(4), Robbery in the Second Degree, in violation of P.L. section 160.10(1), Robbery in the Third Degree, in violation of P.L. section 160.05, and other related charges stemming from an incident that allegedly occurred on November 14, 2016. Defendant moves to suppress a videotaped statement and two line-up identifications on various grounds. On July 27, 28, 31 and August 1, 2017, the court conducted a combined Huntley/Wade/Dunaway hearing.
I make the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
The People presented two witnesses: Parole Officer Jennifer Sass and Detective Sonya Yi. Defendant did not present any witnesses.
Detective Sonya Yi has been working with the New York City Police Department (N.Y.PD) for approximately 13 years, and has been working as a detective with the 81st Precinct for approximately three and a half years. Parole Officer Jennifer Sass has been with the New York State Department of Correction, Community Supervision for approximately 3 years, and is currently assigned to the Queens 1 Area Office. In September 2016, Parole Officer Sass was assigned to supervise Defendant Brandon Craddock. I find the People's witnesses credible.
On November 14, 2016, Detective Yi became involved in an investigation of a robbery that occurred that day in a park on Madison Street between Ralph and Patchen Avenues in Kings County. She was informed by Police Officer Harry that two complainants walked into the 81st Precinct and reported that their cell phones were taken. One of the cellphones taken was an iPhone with the track my iPhone application activated. Officer Harry used her phone to track the stolen iPhone, which tracked to 112–20 Dillon Street in Queens, New York. Officer Harry took the complainants to the Queens address to do a canvass, but Detective Yi had no additional information about the canvass.
Later that day, at approximately 12:20 pm, Detective Yi spoke with the complainants, Dimaine Holmes–Nedd and Jaden Wayne. Each complainant advised her that as they were walking to school, they noticed two individuals following them, and decided to go into the park where they were stopped by the two individuals. One of the individuals displayed a firearm and demanded their cellphones, and then their cellphones were taken.
Mr. Holmes–Nedd described the first individual as a male black, between the ages of 19 and 23, approximately 5'6, slim build, dark short black hair with waves, a scar on his chin, wearing a white hoodie with the hood up, a light blue jacket and gray colored wool 12 Jordan sneakers. The second one he described as a male black, approximately 19 years of age, 6'1 to 6'2, Caesar haircut, medium build, wearing an all-black track suit with Nike logo on the left breast and white uptown sneakers.
Mr. Wayne described the first individual as a male black approximately 19 years of age, 5'6, slim build, scar on his chin, short black hair with waves, wearing a white hoodie with the hood up, black jacket, and gray wool Jordan 12 sneakers. The second one he described as a male black, much taller than the first individual, Caesar haircut wearing a black track suit.
Both complainants informed Detective Yi that the first individual displayed the firearm. She then conducted mug shot photo viewings for both complainants using Photo Manager. Photo Manager is a program that contains mug shot photos, and certain attributes can be selected to conduct the mug shot photo viewing. In this case, the attributes Detective Yi chose were male black between the ages of 17 and 25 years of age, within the 73rd, 81st and 113th Precincts. On separate computers in the same office, the complainants viewed color mug shot photos which appeared one at a time on the computer screen. Mr. Holmes–Nedd began viewing photos at approximately 12:30 or 12:40 pm and viewed over a thousand photos and Mr. Wayne began viewing photos at approximately 1:10 pm and viewed approximately 140 photos. Neither complainant positively identified anyone from the photos. Defendant's photo was not included in the photos viewed by the complainants.
Detective Yi also used a department search system called Das Light which allows you to search by address, name, and other key words. She inputted the Queens address the phone tracked to and it generated numerous pedigree information and ten photos. According to Detective Yi, the photos come out in tab portions, in a column on top of each other, and if available, a photo, name, phone number, address, social security number, date of birth, and NYSID number would appear. Detective Yi could not recall how many of the photos were of men versus women or the ages of any of the individuals, but remembered there was at least one female, all the photos were of black or Hispanic individuals, and Defendant's photo was in the fifth position.
Detective Yi asked Mr. Holmes–Nedd to view the photos and see if he recognized anyone. Mr. Holmes–Nedd identified the fifth photo, a mug shot photo of Brandon Craddock, as one of the guys that robbed him in the park. Using the same NYSID that was on the Das Light program, Detective Yi went on the Photo Manager and printed out Defendant's photo. She then showed the photo to Mr. Holmes–Nedd and asked him if this was the same person he was identifying as the one who robbed him and he answered yes that it was the same individual he saw on the Das Light program. He then signed and dated the photo, which was introduced into evidence as People's No. 1. The photo displays a scar on Defendant's chin. Detective Yi did not print the other photos viewed by Mr. Holmes–Nedd on the Das Light program and the original display cannot be replicated because some photos may have been sealed and others added.
The next day, Detective Yi activated an investigation card, known as an I–Card, for Brandon Craddock. An I–Card is a tool wherein a person's name and date of birth can be activated so that in the case of any police contact, the police would be notified that the person is sought as a witness, perpetrator, or suspect. Detective Yi also generated wanted flyers which were distributed to other commands.
On November 18, 2016, Detective Yi spoke to Detective Ortiz of the Brooklyn North Warrant Squad and requested his assistance in the apprehension of Brandon Craddock. She learned that Brandon Craddock was on parole and was scheduled to see his parole officer on November 22, 2016. That same day, Detective Yi went to a bodega at the corner of Madison Street and Ralph Avenue and downloaded video footage from November 14, 2016 that captured the two complainants, Defendant and another individual. Detective Yi created still images from the video, which were introduced into evidence as People's # 2A–2D.
On November 21, 2016 Officer Sass received a phone call from Detective Ortiz advising her that Brandon Craddock was wanted for a robbery in Brooklyn. Detective Ortiz asked Officer Sass to hold Defendant on his next report date, November 22, 2016. On November 22, 2016 at approximately 7:45 pm, Officer Sass called Defendant into her office and placed him in handcuffs. She advised him that he was wanted by the police and then she contacted Brooklyn detectives to inform them that she had Defendant in custody. Approximately an hour later, Detective Paray picked Defendant up.
On November 22, 2016, Detective Yi was advised by Detective Ortiz that Brandon Craddock had been picked up at his parole office in Queens and transported to the 81st Precinct by Detectives Paray and Jimenez. Defendant arrived at the precinct at approximately 8:50 pm and was placed into a holding cell.
On November 23, 2016, Detective Yi conducted two lineups, one with complainant Wayne and the other with complainant Holmes–Nedd. Defendant was the subject of the lineups and there were five fillers. The same fillers were used for both line ups. For both line ups, Defendant chose to be in position # 1. Photographs of the lineup were admitted into evidence as People's # 3A–3C. Mr. Wayne was brought to the 81st Precinct by Detective Yi and was escorted by an assistant principal. He was placed into a room to wait until he was called in to view the lineup. Mr. Holmes–Nedd arrived at the precinct separately with his mother and was placed into a different room to wait until he was called in to view the lineup. Neither complainant had any contact with Defendant, with the fillers or with each other prior to viewing the lineups. Detective Yi read the instructions that appear on the Lineup Instructions to Witness Report to each complainant separately. Copies of the reports for each complainant were entered into evidence as People's # 4 and # 6.
Mr. Wayne viewed the lineup first at approximately 12:05 pm. During the initial viewing of the lineup, he requested that position # 1 come closer to the window. Detective Yi had the complainant step out of the lineup room with Detective Paray. She then instructed everyone sitting in the lineup to stand up at the window one by one. Mr. Wayne reentered the viewing room and once the curtain was raised, # 1 was standing closer to the window. Mr. Wayne indicated he recognized # 1 as the guy who robbed him in the park. Mr. Wayne and the assistant principal then left the precinct on their own.
At approximately 12:10 pm Mr. Holmes–Nedd viewed the lineup and indicated he recognized # 1 as the guy from the park who robbed him. Afterward, Mr. Holmes–Nedd and his mother left the precinct and Defendant was placed under arrest.
At approximately 1:25 pm that day, Detective Yi...
To continue reading
Request your trial