Opinion
2001-10892.
December 22, 2003.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lott, J.), rendered December 17, 2001, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (William Kastin of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Adam S. Charnoff of counsel), for respondent.
Before: WILLIAM F. MASTRO and REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant claims that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that a prosecution witness could be considered an accomplice as a matter of fact, whose testimony required corroboration. However, the subject witness was, at most, an "accessory after the fact," whose testimony needs no corroboration under CPL 60.22 ( People v. Dygert, 229 A.D.2d 735, 736; People v. Sacco, 199 A.D.2d 288, 289). Accordingly, an accomplice corroboration charge would not have been warranted ( see People v. Young, 235 A.D.2d 441, 442; People v. Brown, 221 A.D.2d 270, 271; People v. Montgomery, 178 A.D.2d 663).
KRAUSMAN, J.P., SCHMIDT, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.