The court properly denied defendant's motion to preclude identification evidence on the ground of lack of CPL 710.30 (1) (b) notice. Rather than being police-arranged, the spontaneous identification made by an eyewitness was a pure happenstance and the People were therefore not required to provide notice (see People v Dixon,
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.