Opinion
December 15, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by limiting the defendant's examination of one of his witnesses. Even though a defendant has a right to introduce evidence that a person other than himself committed the crime ( see, Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284), the evidence must do more than raise a mere suspicion that another person committed the crime. In this case, the defendant failed to show a clear link between the third party and the crime ( see, People v. Felder, 231 A.D.2d 589; People v. Rodriguez, 220 A.D.2d 699; People v. Austin, 112 A.D.2d 242; People v. Aulet, 111 A.D.2d 822; see also, Greenfield v. People, 85 N.Y. 75, 90).
Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.