Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003

People v. Fields

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided October 27, 2003

309 A.D.2d 945; 766 N.Y.S.2d 365; 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11037

Cases that cite this one

19 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Ramirez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
People v. Speaks (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
People v. Rankins (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
People v. Salton (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
People v. Nesbitt (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
People v. Lee (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
People v. Baez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
People v. Holmes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
People v. Fingall (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Jones (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
People v. Marshall (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
People v. Marshall (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
People v. Jones (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
People v. German (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
People v. Reynolds (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
People v. Clark (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
People v. Williams (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
People v. Samuels (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
People v. Malloy (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Roman, J.), rendered January 9, 2001, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

It was reversible error for the prosecutor to elicit testimony from a detective, over the defense counsel’s objection, that the detective arrested the defendant following a lineup after asking the complainant whether she recognized anyone in the lineup. The complainant testified that she identified the defendant at a lineup. The detective’s testimony implicitly bolstered the complainant’s testimony by providing official confirmation of the complainant’s identification of the defendant (see People v Trowbridge, 305 NY 471 [1953]; People v Bacenet, 297 AD2d *946817, 818 [2002]; People v Veal., 158 AD2d 633, 634 [1990]; cf. People v Holt, 67 NY2d 819, 821 [1986]; People v Stanley, 185 AD2d 827, 828-829 [1992]; People v Bryan, 179 AD2d 667, 668 [1992]). A violation of the rule against bolstering may not be overlooked except where the evidence of identity is so strong that there is no serious issue upon that point (see People v Bacenet, supra; People v Veal, supra; cf. People v Johnson, 57 NY2d 969 [1982]). Here, the evidence that the defendant committed the crime was not so overwhelming as to render the error harmless. Smith, J.P., Crane, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.