Opinion
December 20, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, the defendant's motion to vacate the judgment of conviction is denied, and the judgment of conviction is reinstated.
The defendant's motion to vacate the judgment was based primarily on his claim that the prosecution had failed to supply certain Rosario material during the course of his trial (see, People v Rosario, 9 N.Y.2d 286; see also, People v Consolazio, 40 N.Y.2d 446, cert denied 433 U.S. 914; People v Ranghelle, 69 N.Y.2d 56). In People v Jackson ( 78 N.Y.2d 638, on remand 154 Misc.2d 718, affd 198 A.D.2d 301), the Court of Appeals held that, after the right of direct appeal has been exhausted, a motion to vacate a judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL article 440 based on a claim of Rosario error should not be granted unless the Rosario violation in question was actually prejudicial. We conclude that the Rosario material improperly withheld from the defendant in this case had no "significant impeachment value" (People v Bianco, 183 A.D.2d 284, 288) and that there is no reasonable possibility that the Rosario violation affected the jury's verdict. We also find that there is no reasonable possibility that the jury's verdict was affected by the Brady violation (see, Brady v Maryland, 373 U.S. 83) cited by the defendant (see, People v Vilardi, 76 N.Y.2d 67). For these reasons, we reverse and reinstate the judgment of conviction. Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Eiber and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.