People v. Clarke

210 A.D.2d 80, 620 N.Y.S.2d 29
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 13, 1994·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Fred Eggert, J.), entered on December 20, 1993, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment, is unanimously reversed, on the law, and the indictment reinstated.

The issue on appeal is whether video-taped statements by the defendants that are played before the Grand Jury must be simultaneously transcribed by the stenographer pursuant to Judiciary Law § 325. We hold that the video tape played for the Grand Jury does not constitute "testimony” within the meaning of section 325; rather, it is an exhibit readily available for review making simultaneous transcription unnecessary to insure accuracy. Our conclusion is further supported by the fact that if the showing of the video tape did constitute "testimony,” the "testifying” defendant would be entitled to transactional immunity absent a waiver (see, CPL 190.40 [2]; People v D’Amico, 138 AD2d 943, lv denied 71 NY2d 967). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Rosenberger and Nardelli, JJ.

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

People v. Clarke, 210 A.D.2d 80, 620 N.Y.S.2d 29 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

210 A.D.2d 80 (People v. Clarke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Pinnock
210 A.D.2d 102 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)