Opinion
March 2, 1987
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The police officers were justified in temporarily detaining the defendant to allow the complainant to view him, since he matched the rather detailed description of the perpetrator given by the complainant, he was found approximately two blocks from the scene of the crime approximately one hour after the crime occurred, and he was told the specific, limited purpose of the detention (see, People v. Hicks, 68 N.Y.2d 234). Thus, the hearing court did not err in concluding that the identification evidence should not be suppressed as the fruit of an illegal detention. Nor did the hearing court err in concluding that the identification procedure employed was not so unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to misidentification as to have denied the defendant due process of law (see, People v. Smith, 38 N.Y.2d 882; People v. Ford, 110 A.D.2d 847; People v. Digiosaffatte, 63 A.D.2d 703).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.