| People v Siler |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 08660 [45 AD3d 1403] |
| November 9, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael D.Siler, Appellant. |
—[*1] Michael C. Green, District Attorney, Rochester (Stephen X. O'Brien of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.), rendered June18, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of robbery in the seconddegree, robbery in the third degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree and criminal mischief inthe fourth degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby isunanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of, inter alia,robbery in the second degree (Penal Law § 160.10 [1]), defendant contends that CountyCourt erred in refusing to suppress the identification testimony of the robbery victim on theground that the showup identification procedure was unduly suggestive. We reject thatcontention. The showup identification procedure was conducted in geographic and temporalproximity to the robbery (see People v Ortiz, 90 NY2d 533, 537 [1997]; People vDuuvon, 77 NY2d 541, 543-544 [1991]), and the fact that defendant was standing next to apolice officer with a spotlight on him during the showup does not render it unduly suggestive (see People v Delarosa, 28 AD3d1186, 1187 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 811 [2006]; see also People v Robinson, 8 AD3d1028 [2004], affd 5 NY3d 738 [2005]). In any event, any error in admitting thevictim's identification testimony is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Davis, 15 AD3d 930,931 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 761 [2005]). Defendant admitted at trial that he committedthe robbery of the victim, and thus "identification was not at issue at trial" (id.).
Finally, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's requestfor youthful offender status (see generally People v Smith, 286 AD2d 878 [2001], lvdenied 98 NY2d 641 [2002]), and the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.Present—Gorski, J.P., Martoche, Smith, Peradotto and Green, JJ.