Opinion
January 19, 1999.
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Cotter, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the testimony of Detective Frank Puma improperly bolstered another detective's eyewitness account of the defendant's criminal activity. Detective Puma testified that after he was given a description of the narcotics-related activity and the suspect, he ran to his police car to assist in the chase. This testimony was properly admitted as a necessary explanation of the events which resulted in the defendant's arrest ( see, People v. Glover, 191 A.D.2d 582; People v. Byrd, 187 A.D.2d 724).
Joy, J.P., Krausman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.