From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hayes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 19, 1996
226 A.D.2d 1055 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 19, 1996

Appeal from the Onondaga County Court, Mulroy, J.

Present — Green, J.P., Pine, Fallon, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that County Court erred in permitting the People to introduce into evidence the terms of the cooperation agreement with the codefendant, who testified on behalf of the People. We disagree. In his opening statement, defense counsel had attacked the credibility of the codefendant by pointing out his interest in testifying and his motive to fabricate. In response, the People were properly permitted to elicit the bolstering aspect of the cooperation agreement, i.e., the promise by the codefendant to testify truthfully ( see, United States v. Cosentino, 844 F.2d 30, 32-33, cert denied 488 U.S. 923; People v. Cherry, 161 A.D.2d 185, 187, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 854; see also, People v. Gibbs, 210 A.D.2d 4, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 938; People v. Rivera, 155 A.D.2d 941, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 817; People v. Burke, 128 A.D.2d 542, affd 72 N.Y.2d 833, rearg denied 72 N.Y.2d 953). Further, it was not error to allow the codefendant's attorney to testify concerning the terms of the cooperation agreement; he had personal knowledge of the facts and did not testify as an expert.

We have reviewed the remaining contentions raised by defendant and conclude that they are without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Hayes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 19, 1996
226 A.D.2d 1055 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Hayes

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEVIN HAYES, Also…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Apr 19, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 1055 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
642 N.Y.S.2d 118

Citing Cases

People v. Wilborn

05[2]; People v West, 56 NY2d 662, 663; see also People v Hercules, 47 AD3d 835, 836). In any event, we agree…