Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the in-court identification testimony was improper because it was based upon impermissibly suggestive pretrial identification procedures. An in-court identification of a defendant by an eyewitness is proper, notwithstanding unduly suggestive pretrial identification procedures, where it is based upon the eyewitness's independent observation of the defendant (see, People v Brown,
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.