Opinion
March 25, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).
The defendant attempted to introduce into evidence, as a declaration against penal interest, an alleged hearsay statement made by Lawrence Littman to the defendant's mother to the effect that Littman and another man had robbed the complainant and that the defendant was not with them. Insofar as Littman's declaration exculpated the defendant by stating that the defendant was not involved in the commission of the robbery, it was not adverse to Littman's interest, and was consequently not admissible as a declaration against penal interest (see, People v Maerling, 46 N.Y.2d 289; People v Nicholson, 108 A.D.2d 929; People v Thompson, 128 A.D.2d 566). Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Harwood and O'Brien, JJ., concur.