Opinion
February 3, 1989
Appeal from the Cayuga County Court, Corning, J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Doerr, Green, Pine and Lawton, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of burglary in the third degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree, defendant argues that the evidence was not legally sufficient to convict him because the accomplice testimony was not corroborated as required by CPL 60.22 (1). There is no merit to this claim. The court properly instructed the jury that one of the participants in the crimes was an accomplice as a matter of law (see, CPL 60.22; People v Tillotson, 63 N.Y.2d 731; People v Minarich, 46 N.Y.2d 970), but that it was for the jury to decide if other witnesses who were not directly involved were accomplices as a matter of fact (see, People v Cobos, 57 N.Y.2d 798; People v Dorta, 46 N.Y.2d 818, 820; People v Basch, 36 N.Y.2d 154, 157). Furthermore, defendant's admission to an acquaintance that he participated in the crimes charged was sufficient corroboration of any accomplice testimony to sustain the verdict (see, CPL 60.22; People v Burgin, 40 N.Y.2d 953, 954; People v Benedict, 115 A.D.2d 795, 796, affd 68 N.Y.2d 832; People v Shirley, 123 A.D.2d 407, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 750; People v Rushlow, 94 A.D.2d 933).