Opinion
June 19, 1967
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Rensselaer County, rendered upon a verdict, convicting defendant of the crimes of burglary third degree and grand larceny in the first degree and imposing a sentence of imprisonment. The evidence of guilt was established well beyond a reasonable doubt, but defendant additionally assigns error in that an alleged confession of a third person to the crimes of which the defendant stood charged, was erroneously excluded by the court. The defendant attempted to introduce this statement without calling as a witness, the person who is alleged to have made it. It further appears that this person was available as a witness and, as a matter of fact, his location and availability were disclosed to defense counsel by the District Attorney. In any event we would observe that any such statement or confession made by a third party is not only not binding, but to be admitted in evidence in the fashion here proposed, would have violated the hearsay rule ( Greenfield v. People, 85 N.Y. 75, 86; Donnelly v. United States, 228 U.S. 243; Richardson, Evidence [9th ed.], § 206). Defendant's contention that the trial court erred in admitting his statement in evidence on the ground he was not given the warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona ( 384 U.S. 436) is not well founded. Miranda determined that law enforcement officers must give certain admonitions to a person about to be interrogated, but the rule therein laid down does not apply to defendants tried prior to June 13, 1966, as was this defendant. (See Johnson v. New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719; People v. McQueen, 18 N.Y.2d 337.) We find no basis for any of the claims of deprivation of constitutional or other legal rights. Judgment affirmed. Gibson, P.J., Herlihy, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Gabrielli, J.