THE PEOPLE & C., RESPONDENT, v. ARTHUR BROWN, APPELLANT.
86 N.Y.2d 728, 655 N.E.2d 162, 631 N.Y.S.2d 121
June 29, 1995
1 No. 174 (1995 NY Int. 171)
Decided June 29, 1995
_________________________________________________________________
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Karl E. Pflanz, for Appellant.
Margaret M. DePaola, for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division should be modified by remitting
the case to Supreme Court, New York County for a Wade hearing and, as
so modified, affirmed. If it is determined at the Wade hearing that
police suggestiveness tainted the show- up identification procedure,
defendant is entitled to a new trial. If the People prevail at the
Wade hearing, the judgment of conviction and sentence should be
amended to reflect that result.
Defendant, handcuffed and surrounded by police officers in a stairwell
after he was apprehended, was identified by a robbery victim as the
assailant. The victim was robbed of jewelry, allegedly at gunpoint,
several blocks away in the elevator of the building in which he
resided. The victim and his sister informed police officers stationed
nearby of this incident and accompanied the officers in their marked
police car as they canvassed the adjacent block for the perpetrator.
The victim pointed out the person he thought was the robber, and upon
the approach by the police in the marked car, the assailant ran off.
One of the officers pursued that person, who was wearing a brown
sheepskin coat and black baseball hat, on foot and followed him into
an apartment building. By this time, a back-up team of officers had a
rrived on the scene, and fanned out to search the building. The jacket
and hat were recovered in a hallway on the third floor. The individual
was apprehended in the stairwell, and was presented to the victim on
the ground floor landing of the stairwell. Following identification by
the victim, defendant was arrested. Neither a gun nor the stolen
jewelry was recovered.
The trial court improperly concluded without a Wade hearing that the
victim's identification of defendant was free of police suggestion
SNIPPETS:
THE PEOPLE & C., RESPONDENT, v. ARTHUR BROWN, APPELLANT.
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
The order of the Appellate Division should be modified by remitting the case to Supreme
If it is determined at the Wade hearing that police suggestiveness tainted the show- up
Defendant, handcuffed and surrounded by police officers in a stairwell after he was
The victim was robbed of jewelry, allegedly at gunpoint, several blocks away in the elevator
The victim and his sister informed police officers stationed nearby of this incident and
One of the officers pursued that person, who was wearing a brown sheepskin coat and black
The individual was apprehended in the stairwell, and was presented to the victim on the
The trial court improperly concluded without a Wade hearing that the victim's identification
Although the victim initiated the police chase once he pointed out his alleged assailant, the
Absent a hearing, it is impossible to discern whether the police had any influence on the
Therefore, the courts below had no basis to determine that the police arranged show-up was
The determination of whether the showup procedure employed in this case resulted in an unduly
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.
|
