People v. Harper

• Decision Date: 15 November 1988
• Citation: 144 A.D.2d 946,534 N.Y.S.2d 259
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. David HARPER, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 259

534 N.Y.S.2d 259

144 A.D.2d 946

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v.David HARPER, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division Fourth Department.

Nov. 15, 1988.

Edward J. Nowak by William Clauss, Rochester, for appellant.

Howard R. Relin by Wendy Lehmann, Rochester, for respondent.

Before DILLON, P.J., and DENMAN, GREEN, LAWTON and DAVIS, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:

Defendant appeals from his conviction after a jury trial of first degree rape and first degree sodomy arguing that the court erred in admitting portions of the complainant's hospital records containing her detailed description of the crimes (see, Williams v. Alexander, 309 N.Y. 283, 287, 129 N.E.2d 417;People v. Wooden, 66 A.D.2d 1004, 1005, 411 N.Y.S.2d 759).We agree that this evidence constituted improper bolstering, but find the error harmless because, in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt, there is no significant probability that defendant would have been acquitted but for the error (see, People v. Johnson, 57 N.Y.2d 969, 970, 457 N.Y.S.2d 230, 443 N.E.2d 478;People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787).

Defendant's reliance upon People v. Jackson, 124 A.D.2d 975, 509 N.Y.S.2d 230lv. denied69 N.Y.2d 746, 512 N.Y.S.2d 1051, 505 N.E.2d 249, is misplaced.There, this court refused to find a similar error harmless because "the sole direct evidence implicating defendant was the testimony of the complainant."Here, however, defendant's guilt was established by testimony that defendant, who matched the description complainant gave her mother, was apprehended near the complainant's house shortly after the incident in possession of a knife, and also by the results of...