People v. McLaughlin
| Decision Date | 27 July 1987 |
| Citation | 132 A.D.2d 712,518 N.Y.S.2d 407 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Edward McLAUGHLIN a/k/a Edward McLoughlin, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Scheideler and Proscia, Kew Gardens (Joseph Scheideler, of counsel), for appellant.
Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood, Richard J. Cutler and Robert E. Lesser, of counsel), for respondent.
Before LAWRENCE, J.P., and KUNZEMAN, KOOPER and SPATT, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Meyerson, J.), rendered August 19, 1985, convicting him of attempted sodomy in the first degree and criminal use of a firearm in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the police did not have a sufficient basis to stop and detain him pending an identification by the complainant. The evidence adduced at the hearing demonstrated that the police located the defendant within five minutes after the radio run regarding the incident was received and only several blocks from the scene of the crime. Moreover, the defendant fit the description of the perpetrator. Under the circumstances, the police were justified in detaining the defendant pending an identification by the complainant (see, People v. Hicks, 68 N.Y.2d 234, 242, 508 N.Y.S.2d 163, 500 N.E.2d 861; People v. Francheschi, 128 A.D.2d 723, 513 N.Y.S.2d 216).
We further find that the subsequent showup identification procedure was not unduly suggestive. A prompt, on-the-scene showup identification is an appropriate method for identifying suspects where the witness is shown the suspect within a short time after the incident (see, People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023, 457 N.Y.S.2d 474, 443 N.E.2d 948; People v. Brnja, 70 A.D.2d 17, 23, 419 N.Y.S.2d 591, affd. 50 N.Y.2d 366, 429 N.Y.S.2d 173, 406 N.E.2d 1066; People v. Francheschi, supra ). Moreover, the circumstances of the showup were not suggestive inasmuch as the defendant was standing next to two plainclothes officers and was not handcuffed or restrained.
The defendant's claim that his guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt is without merit. Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the evidence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Taylor
...622, 326 N.E.2d 294; see also, CPL 140.50[1]; People v. DeBour, 40 N.Y.2d 210, 233, 386 N.Y.S.2d 375, 352 N.E.2d 562; People v. McLaughlin, 132 A.D.2d 712, 518 N.Y.S.2d 407). At the suppression hearing, the defendant did not specifically challenge the reliability of the information provided......
-
People v. Greene
...(see, People v. Chin, 178 A.D.2d 423, 577 N.Y.S.2d 119, lv. denied 79 N.Y.2d 945, 583 N.Y.S.2d 199, 592 N.E.2d 807; People v. McLaughlin, 132 A.D.2d 712, 518 N.Y.S.2d 407, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 752, 520 N.Y.S.2d 1028, 514 N.E.2d 1380). Further, once Maloney arrived on the scene with informat......
-
People v. Vasalka
...People v. Hicks, 68 N.Y.2d 234, 508 N.Y.S.2d 163, 500 N.E.2d 861; People v. Bedoya, 190 A.D.2d 812, 593 N.Y.S.2d 858; People v. McLaughlin, 132 A.D.2d 712, 518 N.Y.S.2d 407). When the witness failed to identify the defendant or his companion as the assailant, they were both released. The he......
-
People v. McLaughlin
...752, 514 N.E.2d 1380 People v. McLaughlin (Edward), a/k/a McLoughlin (Edward) COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK Sept 14, 1987 Bellacosa, J. 132 A.D.2d 712, 518 N.Y.S.2d 407 App.Div. 2, Kings Denied. ...