Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. BAPTISTE

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Mar 9, 1998

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the "point-out" identification at issue was a witness-initiated procedure ( see, People v. Flores, 232 A.D.2d 654; People v. Burgos, 219 A.D.2d 504; cf., People v. Dixon, 85 N.Y.2d 218). Thus, the People are not required to provide notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 that they intend to present evidence of the identification at trial ( see, People v. Burgos, supra).

The sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

Rosenblatt, J. P., O'Brien, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.