PEOPLE v. WILLIAMS (1997)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Robert C. WILLIAMS, Respondent.

Decided: April 25, 1997

Before GREEN, J.P., and PINE, CALLAHAN, BALIO and BOEHM, JJ.

Michael A. Arcuri by David Goldbas, Utica, for Appellant. Rebecca Wittman, New Hartford, for Respondent.

As a sanction against the People for including an inaccurate date in their CPL 710.30 notice, County Court suppressed identification evidence. That was error. By moving for suppression, defendant waived his right to challenge the adequacy of the CPL 710.30 notice (see, People v. Lopez, 84 N.Y.2d 425, 618 N.Y.S.2d 879, 643 N.E.2d 501; People v. Merrill, 226 A.D.2d 1045, 642 N.Y.S.2d 126, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 1022, 651 N.Y.S.2d 21, 673 N.E.2d 1248). We therefore remit the matter to Oneida County Court for a hearing on defendant's original suppression motion to determine whether the identification procedures employed by the police were unduly suggestive (see, CPL 710.60[4] ). We also grant the People's motion for leave to amend the notice to include the correct date.

Order unanimously reversed on the law, People's motion granted and matter remitted to Oneida County Court for further proceedings.

MEMORANDUM:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network