People v. Bernstein

69 A.D.2d 907, 415 N.Y.S.2d 905, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11666
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 30, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 69 A.D.2d 907 (People v. Bernstein) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Bernstein, 69 A.D.2d 907, 415 N.Y.S.2d 905, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11666 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

Appeal by defendants from two judgments (one as to each of them) of the Supreme Court, Kings County, both rendered January 15, 1978, convicting them each of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fifth degrees and conspiracy in the first degree, upon jury verdicts, and imposing sentences. Judgments reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. In our opinion it was error for the trial court to have admitted into evidence the tape made by an undercover officer on June 2, 1976. After listening to the tape we find it was so inaudible that a jury would have had to speculate as to its contents (see People v Sacchitella, 31 AD2d 180). The tape consisted mainly of background noises of a busy restaurant from which only isolated phrases of conversation could be discerned. At an audibility hearing, the trial court listened to the tape with the aid of a transcript supplied by the People. It ruled that the sounds on the tape were so "equivocal” in their meaning that the "interpretation” contained in the transcript would be prejudicial to defendants and accordingly excluded the transcript from consideration by the jury. Thus, the tape did not meet the test enunciated by us in People v Mincey (64 AD2d 615), that a tape "should at least be sufficiently audible so that independent third [908]*908parties can listen to it and produce a reasonable transcript.” Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Rabin and Mangano, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Melendez
2021 NY Slip Op 04497 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Wilson v. Bodian
130 A.D.2d 221 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
People v. Ryan
121 A.D.2d 34 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
People v. Sealy
106 A.D.2d 479 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
People v. Bazelais
98 A.D.2d 802 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
People v. Heckstall
90 A.D.2d 835 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 A.D.2d 907, 415 N.Y.S.2d 905, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bernstein-nyappdiv-1979.