Majority
Appeal by the defen
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in limiting defense counsel’s cross-examination of the detectives regarding certain physical characteristics of the lineup participants (see, Delaware v Van Arsdall, 475 US 673 ; People v Chipp, 75 NY2d 327 , cert denied 498 US 833 ). The characteristics at issue were readily discernible from a photograph of the lineup that was before the court (see, e.g., People v Mattocks, 133 AD2d 89 ). Because the lineup procedure was not otherwise unduly suggestive, the court did not err in denying suppression of identification testimony (see, People v Chipp, supra). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Krausman and Plorio, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Delaware v. Van Arsdall 475 US 673 p. 737
- People v. Chipp 75 NY2d 327 p. 737
- People v. Mattocks 133 AD2d 89 p. 737