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. Carl COOK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Carruthers, J., at suppression hearing; Carol Berkman, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered October 30, 1996, convicting defendant of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's motion to suppress identification testimony was properly denied. Since neither defendant nor the attorney representing him on another case requested counsel's presence at the lineup, the right to counsel did not attach (People v. Foy, 212 A.D.2d 446, 447, 622 N.Y.S.2d 937, lv. denied 85 N.Y.2d 938, 627 N.Y.S.2d 1000, 651 N.E.2d 925). A review of the lineup photos confirms the court's determination that, except for one individual, differences in height and weight between defendant and the fillers were minimized by the fact that all participants were seated, and that otherwise all participants appeared sufficiently similar in physical characteristics so that there was no substantial likelihood that defendant would be singled out for identification (People v. Edmonds, 223 A.D.2d 455, 637 N.Y.S.2d 71, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 984, 649 N.Y.S.2d 391, 672 N.E.2d 617).
The record refutes defendant's claim that the court prohibited his counsel from issuing a subpoena for a proposed witness. Further, the court appropriately exercised its discretion in denying defendant's application for a court-ordered subpoena, since defendant's offer of proof indicated that he sought production of the witness to explore general credibility issues and to conduct mid-trial discovery (see, People v. Wallace, 239 A.D.2d 272, 658 N.Y.S.2d 843, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 912, 663 N.Y.S.2d 524, 686 N.E.2d 236).
We have considered and rejected defendant's additional claims.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: October 13, 1998
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)