People v. Duran
This text of 276 A.D.2d 498 (People v. Duran) 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.
Opinion
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weissman, J.), rendered September 22, 1997, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court providently exercised its discretion in declining to order and review the psychiatric records of the complainant. Psychiatric records “are to be disclosed only when their confidentiality is significantly outweighed by the interests of justice” (People v Brooks, 199 AD2d 275). Prior to ordering and inspecting such records there should be “a showing of a reasonable likelihood that the records might contain material bearing on the reliability and accuracy of the witness’s testimony” (People v Arnold, 177 AD2d 633, 634). Here, there was no showing that the complainant’s psychiatric records contained material which would bear on the complainant’s ability to accurately perceive the incident. In addition, there was no showing that she had a history of paranoia, hallucinations, delusions, or false claims of sexual attack (see generally, People v Smith, 192 AD2d 806, 808).
[499]*499The tape recording of the emergency telephone conversation was admissible under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule (see, People v Simpson, 238 AD2d 611). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
276 A.D.2d 498, 713 N.Y.S.2d 561, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9837, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-duran-nyappdiv-2000.