Opinion
February 1, 1988
Appeal from the Family Court, Queens County (Torres, J.).
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The court did not err in admitting into evidence testimony that the police officer received a police radio report stating that the vehicle the officer was observing was stolen. This was offered primarily for the purpose of explaining the officer's actions, rather than to prove that the vehicle was, indeed stolen. That evidence was not hearsay, since it was only admitted for the fact that the statement was made (see, Richardson, Evidence § 203 [Prince 10th ed]; cf., People v Jimenez, 102 A.D.2d 439, 443). Even if this testimony had been considered for its truth, its inclusion was harmless, since the owner of the vehicle identified the vehicle recovered as his and stated that it had been taken without his permission.
We have considered the appellant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Brown, Rubin and Harwood, JJ., concur.