PEOPLE v. MIKEL (1997)

 We agree with defendant that the submission of an annotated verdict sheet to the jury requires reversal (see, People v. Richardson, 234 A.D.2d 952, 652 N.Y.S.2d 173;  see also, People v. Damiano, 87 N.Y.2d 477, 640 N.Y.S.2d 451, 663 N.E.2d 607).   We reject defendant's contention that a witness did not have an independent basis for her in-court identification of defendant.   The suppression court concluded that the photo array identification procedure was impermissibly suggestive and held a hearing to determine whether the witness had an independent basis for her identification of defendant.   The witness testified that she saw defendant less than a week before the incident in question and observed a frontal view of him in broad daylight.   She further testified that she was a passenger in a car with defendant for several hours that same day and that she was in a vehicle with defendant for several hours the night of the incident.   Supreme Court properly concluded that there was an independent basis for the witness's identification (see, People v. Bostic [appeal No. 2], 222 A.D.2d 1073, 636 N.Y.S.2d 516, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 876, 645 N.Y.S.2d 451, 668 N.E.2d 422;  see also, People v. Bones, 125 A.D.2d 931, 510 N.Y.S.2d 328, lv. denied 69 N.Y.2d 824, 513 N.Y.S.2d 1031, 506 N.E.2d 542;  People v. Siplin, 120 A.D.2d 933, 502 N.Y.S.2d 878, lv. denied 68 N.Y.2d 817, 507 N.Y.S.2d 1035, 499 N.E.2d 884).

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted.

MEMORANDUM: