Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the complainant's in-court identification should be suppressed as the product of a tainted photographic identification. However, this issue is not relevant in this case because the complainant knew the defendant prior to the robbery. Thus, the defendant's motion was properly denied (see, People v Johnson,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
