Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he failed to show that the evidence adduced at trial constituted additional pertinent facts which could not have been discovered by him with reasonable diligence before the determination of that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress identification evidence and which would have materially affected that determination (see CPL 710.40 [4]; People v Clark,
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.