Opinion
September 22, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Bambrick, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
Despite the defendant's vigorous attack upon the conviction, we conclude that an affirmance is in order. While it is true that the four criteria outlined in People v Dawson ( 50 N.Y.2d 311, 321, n 4) were not followed to the letter, the cross-examination by the prosecutor evoked answers substantially complying with three of them, and the fourth — familiarity with the means to make the information available to law enforcement authorities — may be inferred from the evidence. While the charge could have been better on the Dawson issue, under all the circumstances, we would not reverse on that basis.
The balance of the defendant's contentions do not merit reversal. Lazer, J.P., Thompson, Niehoff and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.