People v. Green
Decision Date | 15 October 1991 |
Citation | 581 N.E.2d 1330,576 N.Y.S.2d 75,78 N.Y.2d 1029 |
Parties | , 581 N.E.2d 1330 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Benjamin GREEN, Also Known as Benjamin Greene, Appellant. |
Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division, 159 A.D.2d 432, 553 N.Y.S.2d 117, should be reversed and a new trial ordered.
The Grand Jury testimony of an eyewitness to the crime, which identified defendant as one of the perpetrators, did not fall within the classes of prior testimony rendered admissible in criminal proceedings by CPL 670.10. Inasmuch as the statute's "three carefully worded and enumerated exceptions" are exclusive (People v. Harding, 37 N.Y.2d 130, 134, 371 N.Y.S.2d 493, 332 N.E.2d 354, see, People v. Ayala, 75 N.Y.2d 422, 429, 554 N.Y.S.2d 412, 553 N.E.2d 960), the trial court erred in allowing the witness' prior testimony to be admitted as evidence-in-chief against the defendant. Under the circumstances of this case, in which identification was the central issue, we cannot conclude that the error was harmless.
While I agree with the majority that the admission of the Grand Jury testimony of an eyewitness to the crime was error, I am persuaded, as was the Appellate Division, that the error was harmless. The testimony of that witness was not the sole identification of the defendant as one of the perpetrators. Indeed, the son of the victim who was present at the time of the incident clearly and unequivocally identified defendant as one of the assailants.
As noted by the Appellate Division, that and other testimony which confirmed the (People v. Green, 159 A.D.2d 432, 433, 553 N.Y.S.2d 117.) Thus, there should be an affirmance.
ALEXANDER, J., dissents and votes to affirm in an opinion.
Order reversed, etc.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Morales v. Portuondo
...not fall within the parameters of the statute. See Robinson, 657 N.Y.S.2d at 578, 679 N.E.2d 1055 (citing People v. Green, 78 N.Y.2d 1029, 576 N.Y.S.2d 75, 581 N.E.2d 1330 (1991)). 7. The Robinson court's decision to admit the grand jury testimony rested largely on the prosecution's prior o......
-
People v. Geraci
...a general rule, the Grand Jury testimony of an unavailable witness is inadmissible as evidence-in-chief (see, People v. Green, 78 N.Y.2d 1029, 576 N.Y.S.2d 75, 581 N.E.2d 1330; People v. Gonzalez, 54 N.Y.2d 729, 442 N.Y.S.2d 980, 426 N.E.2d 474; CPL 670.10). However, the lower courts of thi......
-
People v. DiTommaso
...in federal custody and cannot with due diligence be brought before the court ” (emphasis added).Relying on People v. Green, 78 N.Y.2d 1029, 576 N.Y.S.2d 75, 581 N.E.2d 1330 (1991), which defendant cites in a footnote, the concurrence states that the three categories listed in the statute ar......
-
People v. Tapia
...was no cross-examination in the prior proceeding. In this regard, defendant's and the dissent's reliance on People v. Green, 78 N.Y.2d 1029, 576 N.Y.S.2d 75, 581 N.E.2d 1330 [1991] for the proposition that CPL 670.10 is essentially a categorical exclusion of grand jury testimony of a live......