1250 Broadway, 27th Floor New York, NY 10001

CARNELL KNOWLEDGE?

00314389.jpgDuring the course of his criminal trial, Carnell Drayton asked the New York County Supreme Court to suppress the identification testimony, claiming that his lineup was unduly suggestive because he was the only person wearing a white shirt. (Since the victim believed the perp was wearing a white shirt, Drayton thought his state of dress triggered a substantial likelihood that he'd be fingered.)

After his request was denied, and he was convicted of "grand larceny in the fourth degree and fraudulent accosting," Carnell appealed.

Interestingly, the Appellate Division, First Department, viewed a white shirt as a "common article of clothing" which wouldn't attract attention, particularly since it wasn't a prominent part of the victim's description.

Wasn't there another way to dress that up?

00283976.gifTo view a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: People v. Drayton

Categories: