Opinion
February 20, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Linakis, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
As argued by the defendant and conceded by the People, the trial court erred by permitting the prosecutor, over the defendant's objection, to impeach one of his own witnesses in violation of CPL 60.35 (see, People v Fitzpatrick, 40 N.Y.2d 44; People v Knatz, 76 A.D.2d 889). Moreover, we agree with the defendant's further contention that the prosecutor was improperly permitted, over the defendant's objection, to attack his credibility by recalling a witness, on rebuttal, who merely repeated certain testimony he had given on the People's direct case (see, People v McRoy, 121 A.D.2d 566, 569; cf., People v Harris, 57 N.Y.2d 335, 345, cert denied 460 U.S. 1047).
However, we find that these errors, even considered cumulatively, were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt since the improperly allowed testimony did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial and there was strong independent evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v McRoy, supra; see also, People v Saez, 69 N.Y.2d 802; People v Brown, 126 A.D.2d 657; People v Mathure, 111 A.D.2d 876).
We find no merit to the defendant's claim that his sentence was excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mollen, P.J., Lawrence, Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.