Matter of Angel W., 2011 NY Slip Op 01882 [82 AD3d 523]

March 15, 2011

Appellate Division, First Department

— [*1]

Patricia W. Jellen, Eastchester, for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jane L. Gordon of counsel), for presentment agency.

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.), entered on or about January 27, 2010, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed acts, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied appellant’s motion to suppress identification testimony. The record unequivocally establishes that the victim initially identified appellant at a prompt, on-the-scene showup. Later that night, the victim accidentally viewed appellant at the precinct. This was not a police-arranged identification procedure ( see People v Cannon , 13 AD3d 159 , 160 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 762 [2005]). Moreover, since the victim had just made a reliable identification at the scene of the crime, the second viewing was essentially confirmatory, and it was unlikely to have created a risk of misidentification ( see People v Gilbert , 295 AD2d 275 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 558 [*2] [2002]). Furthermore, the hearing evidence demonstrated that the victim had an independent source for his identification of appellant. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ..