Judge Erik Pitchal
The court held a Wade hearing regarding this robbery matter. Officers received a radio run regarding a robbery involving five to six black and Hispanic teens, both males and females. They spoke with complainant Ebert, who stated he was mugged and gave the same description as the radio run, adding one detail—one of the female suspects looked like a male. Officers took Ebert on a canvas of the area, then to a subway station, that was a few steps from the station house. Other officers brought out various individuals to the top of the steps, one by one, while Ebert was in the patrol car, and identified each individual as a suspect in the robbery. The court held that the identification procedure utilized was not unduly suggestive, denying the application to suppress the identification at fact-finding. It found respondents failed to persuade the court that the identification procedure law enforcement use was unduly suggestive, noting the show-up procedure leading Ebert to identify respondents occurred within a few blocks of the robbery location, and within a mere 30 minutes of the incident. As no evidence was presented as to the order in which each respondent was identified by Ebert, the court did not find the show-up unduly suggestive, denying suppression.