Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing court did not err in denying his motion to suppress the identification testimony of the undercover officer who purchased narcotics from him on two separate occasions. Although more than one month elapsed between the sales and the defendant's arrest, the officer spontaneously identified the defendant on June 2, 1993, when he unexpectedly encountered the defendant walking along...
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.
