Opinion
March 31, 1986
Appeal from the County Court, Rockland County (Edelstein, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
Shortly after the commission of the crimes, while being interviewed by detectives, an accomplice of the defendant gave statements which implicated the defendant. The accomplice was not produced at trial and, over objection, her statements were admitted through the testimony of the detectives. The defendant contends that because he was unable to cross-examine the accomplice, he was denied his constitutional right to confrontation.
In spite of the fact that the court instructed the jury that the statements were not being offered for their truth, but merely as proof that they had been made, the statements were improperly admitted (see, People v. Geoghegan, 51 N.Y.2d 45, 49; People v. Maerling, 46 N.Y.2d 289; cf. People v. Settles, 46 N.Y.2d 154).
However, abundant evidence, independent of the accomplice's statements, overwhelmingly established the guilt of the defendant. Because there is no reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to the defendant's conviction, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, reversal is not warranted (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237).
Moreover, the defendant did not make a factual showing sufficient to establish a prima facie case of systematic discrimination by the prosecutor's office in the selection of petit juries over a period of time (see, People v. McCray, 57 N.Y.2d 542, cert denied 461 U.S. 961; People v. Charles, 61 N.Y.2d 321, 329).
We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Brown, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.