Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. David GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Colleen McMahon, J. at hearing; George Daniels, J. at jury trial and sentence), rendered September 11, 1997, convicting defendant of robbery in the first and second degrees and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 25, 15 and 15 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Contrary to defendant's argument, the evidence of defendant's identity, which included compelling physical evidence connecting defendant to the crime, was overwhelming.
Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. The fact that defendant's position in the lineup did not correspond with his number card was the result of his own choice (see, People v. Adams, 165 A.D.2d 760, 560 N.Y.S.2d 194, lv. denied 76 N.Y.2d 983, 563 N.Y.S.2d 772, 565 N.E.2d 521).
The fact that the court's instruction on accessorial liability mentioned defendant by name did not convey an opinion as to defendant's guilt or otherwise cause any prejudice since the court's charge, read as a whole, made clear that defendant's identity as one of the perpetrators had to be established beyond a reasonable doubt.
Defendant's objection to evidence of a photographic identification was not only unpreserved but expressly waived, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that defendant opened the door to the challenged testimony.
We find no reason to disturb the sentence.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: November 14, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)