People v. Mateo

QUEENS COUNTY
Criminal Practice

New York Law Journal

   |0 Comments

Justice Ira Margulis

Mateo and Mejia were charged with murder, and kidnapping. After a combined Huntley/Dunaway/Wade(Rodriguez)/Payton hearing, the court denied both defendants' applications to suppress their identification as a product of undue suggestiveness. It also denied the defendants' applications to suppress statements. The court held a Rodriguez hearing because the detective employed a single photo show when he asked a witness to identify the defendants. It noted that the witness identified Mejia as "Lolo" and stated that he knew him because he was his sister's boyfriend. He also identified Mateo as "Tito" and stated that he had known the defendants for several years and had seen them at family functions. In addition, the witness stated that he had contact with both defendants before and after the crimes were committed. The court found that the identification procedure was confirmatory. It determined that the man who identified the defendants had sufficient familiarity with them such that his identification after viewing a single photo of each defendant was not the result of undue influence by the detective who employed the single photo show-up.

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202579480258

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.