People v. Johnson

105 A.D.2d 1085, 482 N.Y.S.2d 188, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21173
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Johnson. Read the opinion of the Court — 86 A.D.2d 165

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court properly excluded defendant’s hearsay statement, communicated to his former attorney, in which defendant allegedly admitted using a stolen credit card. This statement is not admissible as a declaration against penal interest because a statement made to an attorney is confidential and, therefore, not adverse to one’s penal interest and because, in the instant case, there is a complete absence of any supporting circumstances attesting to the trustworthiness of the statement (People v Settles, 46 NY2d 154, 167; see, also, People v Trice, 101 AD2d 581). (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Maas, J. — peijury, first degree.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and O’Donnell, JJ.

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

People v. Johnson, 105 A.D.2d 1085, 482 N.Y.S.2d 188, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21173 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

105 A.D.2d 1085 (People v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Settles
385 N.E.2d 612 (New York Court of Appeals, 1978)
People v. Trice
101 A.D.2d 581 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)