Opinion
Submitted January 22, 1970
Decided February 19, 1970
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, JOSEPH A. SARAFITE, J.
Lawrence Stern and Milton Adler for appellant.
Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney ( Peter F. Schwindt and Michael R. Juviler of counsel), for respondent.
MEMORANDUM. The order should be affirmed. The police obtained a statement from the defendant, following his arraignment, in the absence of his assigned counsel. This was improper, and such statement would not have been admissible in evidence against the defendant. However, the District Attorney was privileged to employ it, in cross-examining the defendant, for impeachment purposes. (See People v. Hudson, 26 N.Y.2d 781; People v. Harris, 25 N.Y.2d 175; People v. Kulis, 18 N.Y.2d 318.) In any event, even if use of the statement were to be regarded as error, it would be deemed harmless since it did not incriminate the defendant. (See, e.g., People v. Miles, 23 N.Y.2d 527, 544.)
Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BRIETEL, JASEN and GIBSON concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.