Majority
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), rendered October 31, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts), grand larceny in the fourth degree, and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the police had probable cause for his arrest based upon the victim’s identification of him as one of the perpetrators (see, People v Pagan, 184 AD2d 738 ). The identification was not the product of a police-arranged procedure. Rather, the victim spontaneously identified the defendant to an approaching police officer (see, People v Leuthner, 216 AD2d 327 ). Since the defendant moved to suppress the identification testimony and a hearing was held, any defect in the notice given by the People pursuant to CPL 710.30 (1) (b) became irrelevant (see, People v Kirkland, 89 NY2d 903 , 905).
The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 ).
The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Pagan 184 AD2d 738 p. 513
- People v. Leuthner 216 AD2d 327 p. 513
- People v. Kirkland 89 NY2d 903 at 905 p. 513
- People v. Logan 74 NY2d 859 p. 514
- People v. Contes 60 NY2d 620 p. 514
- People v. Suitte 90 AD2d 80 p. 514