# People v. Brown

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · September 23, 2002 · 297 A.D.2d 748

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6088041

## Case

- **Full name:** The People of the State of New York v. Rahkeem Brown
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** September 23, 2002
- **Citations:** 297 A.D.2d 748; 747 N.Y.2d 784; 747 N.Y.S.2d 784; 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8663
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6088041

## Opinion text

*749 The defendant’s contention that the prosecutor improperly attempted to bolster the victim’s identification testimony is not preserved for appellate review, since he failed to object to it specifically at trial (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Ortiz, 164 AD2d 872 ). In any event, the defendant’s claim is without merit. “Under CPL 60.30, a witness’s testimony as to identifications he or she made at prior court proceedings are admissible notwithstanding their bolstering effect on the witness’s testimony” (People v Rosario, 186 AD2d 598, 599 ; see also People v White, 73 NY2d 468, 473 , cert denied sub nom. White v New York, 493 US 859 ; People v Saunders, 166 AD2d 546 ).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Florio, J.P., S. Miller, Crane and Mastro, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6088041. Public record. Not legal advice.