Majority
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Honorof, J.), rendered September 10, 2014, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (three counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the People were required to provide him with notice of the identification testimony of a certain witness is without merit. Since there was no previous identification of the defendant by that witness, no such notice was required (see CPL 710.30; People v Trammel, 84 NY2d 584 [1994]; People v Williams, 58 AD3d 771 , 771 [2009]; People v Goodwine, 46 AD3d 702 , 703 [2007]; People v Soto, 22 AD3d 511 [2005]; People v Romano, 282 AD2d 764 , 765 [2001]).
As the People concede, the Supreme Court erred in allowing
Balkin, J.P., Austin, Sgroi and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Trammel 84 NY2d 584 p. 768
- People v. Goodwine 46 AD3d 702 at 703 p. 768
- People v. Soto 22 AD3d 511 p. 768
- People v. Cortez 22 NY3d 1061 at 1069-1072 p. 769
- People v. Crimmins 36 NY2d 230 at 241-242 p. 769
- People v. White 136 AD3d 846 p. 769