In Harris, the Court concluded that the fact that the complainant's declaration followed the police officer's questions did not negate the declaration's status as an excited utterance because it is reasonable to conclude that the officer asked the question to determine whether there was any further danger to the complainant.
Summary of this case from People v. VarnerJuly 13, 2011.
Evidence — Hearsay Evidence — Excited Utterance Exception.
In Harris, the Court concluded that the fact that the complainant's declaration followed the police officer's questions did not negate the declaration's status as an excited utterance because it is reasonable to conclude that the officer asked the question to determine whether there was any further danger to the complainant.
Summary of this case from People v. VarnerIn Harris, the accusatory instrument alleged that the police officer deponent had arrived at the location in response to a radio run, which had been broadcast 15–20 minutes earlier.
Summary of this case from People v. VarnerFull title:People v. Harris (Jamel)
Court:Criminal Court of the City of New York. Queens County
Date published: Jul 13, 2011
or a domestic incident and observed complainant to be upset and crying with a visible laceration, redness and…
People v. VarnerShe told the officer that the defendant had choked her. The Appellate Term held that while it was impossible…