Opinion
October 14, 1986
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Leggett, J.).
Justice Niehoff has been substituted for the late Justice Gibbons (see, 22 NYCRR 670.2 [c]).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant was accused of holding the complainant in his apartment against her will and raping and sodomizing her over a three-day period. The defendant claims that the prosecutor's summation deprived him of a fair trial. Although the prosecutor did at times make comments which could be interpreted as vouching for the credibility of the complainant, the comments were in response to the defense counsel's reference to the complainant as a liar. Taking the summation in this context, there was no prejudice (see, People v Gilmore, 106 A.D.2d 399).
The defendant contends that the evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant should have been suppressed because the warrant was based in part on the unsworn statement of the complainant. However, a magistrate issuing a search warrant may reasonably rely on hearsay information supplied by an identified citizen, particularly here where the information is based on the firsthand knowledge of the victim (see, People v Cantre, 95 A.D.2d 522, affd 65 N.Y.2d 790).
We have examined the defendant's other contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Niehoff, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.