Motion to Suppress Indentification Testimony as Unreliable

In People v Reeves (152 AD3d 1173, 1176 [4th Dept 2017]), the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, suppressed identification testimony based on the alleged unreliability of the witness's identification, despite the fact that the identification was not the product of unduly suggestive police procedures. The Court held that he “ ‘linchpin’ in determining the admissibility of a pretrial identification at a trial is reliability.” The Court held that this claim was preserved because the suppression motion “as based on CPL 710.20(6)—which is not in any manner limited to ‘suggestiveness’—and on the broad grounds that the pretrial identification procedure was “unnecessarily suggestive and was based on CPL 710.20(6)—which is not in any manner limited to “suggestiveness”—and on the broad grounds that the pretrial identification procedure was “unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification in violation of ... the Constitution of New York State and the United States Constitution.” In light of Reeves, pre-trial suppression motions should seek suppression of identification testimony, in part, on the ground that the proffered testimony was unreliable and conducive to a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification in violation of ... the Constitution of New York State and the United States Constitution and cited Reeves.