Opinion
March 8, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J.
Present — Denman, P.J., Lawton, Wesley, Doerr and Balio, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not err in admitting into evidence a tape recording of a telephone call placed to plant security personnel by the victim of an attempted robbery immediately after the incident. The evidence was properly admitted pursuant to the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule ( see, People v Buie, 86 N.Y.2d 501; People v Brown, 80 N.Y.2d 729; People v Montgomery, 224 A.D.2d 914). Because the evidence is admissible under an independent hearsay exception, "we reject the bolstering concept as inapplicable in this case" ( People v Buie, supra, at 509; see also, People v Lewis, 222 A.D.2d 1058). Contrary to defendant's argument, the People are not required to demonstrate a pressing need for the evidence as a prerequisite to its admissibility ( see, People v Buie, supra, at 509). The tape was evidence of a "powerfully probative nature" ( People v Buie, supra, at 513), the value of which outweighed its potential for prejudice ( see, People v Lewis, supra).