Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. HAROLD OLIVER, Appellant.

MEMORANDUM: Prior to the passage of the new Criminal Procedure Law, it would have been proper for the Trial Judge, under certain circumstances, to deny a motion for a pretrial hearing to determine if pretrial photographic identification was improperly obtained ( People v. Ganci, 27 N.Y.2d 418, 427). The new Criminal Procedure Law, however, changes that rule and makes a requested pretrial hearing mandatory in a case such as the one at bar. (See CPL 710.20, subd. 5; 710.30, subd. 2; 710.40; see, also, People v. Harrington, 31 N.Y.2d 785, 786.) It was therefore error to deny the motion for a pretrial hearing in this case. However, we agree with the Appellate Division that, given the overwhelming proof of guilt apart from the contested identification testimony, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, RABIN and STEVENS concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. OLIVER
(Jun 26, 1974)