Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Given the number of times the complainant saw the defendant before the incidents in question and the highly charged and memorable nature of the incidents, his identification testimony of the defendant was confirmatory. Therefore, the hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony (see United States v Wade,
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.