Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. The record supports the hearing court's finding that the photographs in the array shown to the complainant were sufficiently similar to avoid drawing attention to defendant. Any "minor discrepancies in apparent age between the individuals in the six photographs * * * did not impermissibly highlight or distinguish defendant's photograph in any way" (People v Tapling,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
PEOPLE v. BANKS
276 A.D.2d 294 (2000)
714 N.Y.S.2d 20
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMAL BANKS, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided October 10, 2000.
Decided October 10, 2000.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.