Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Moses
Additionally, we conclude that the court properly precluded defense counsel from eliciting defendant's alleged exculpatory statements during the testimony of a police officer because the statements were "self-serving" and "constituted inadmissible hearsay" ( People v Hill , 281 AD2d 917, 918 [4th Dept 2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 902 [2001]; see People v Weston , 249 AD2d 496 , 496 [2d Dept 1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 931 [1998]).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Pearson
“The general rule is that a party’s self-serving statement is inadmissible at trial when offered in his or her favor, and it may not be introduced either through the testimony of the party or through the testimony of a third person” {People v Oliphant, 201 AD2d 590, 590-591 [1994]; see People v Weston, 249 AD2d 496 [1998]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Tucker v. Bennett
See People v. Weston, 249 A.D.2d 496 , 671 N.Y.S.2d 518, 528-29 (2d Dep’t 1998) (holding defendant’s hearsay statement inadmissible when offered in his favor); People v. Cuevas, 138 A.D.2d 620, 621-22 , 526 N.Y.S.2d 206, 207 (2d Dep’t 1988) (holding that defendant may not offer his own self-serving out-of-court statements into evidence).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Hill
The court properly precluded defense counsel from questioning the arresting officer concerning self-serving exculpatory statements made by defendant at the time of his arrest because those statements constituted inadmissible hearsay (see, People v Middleton, 247 AD2d 713, 714 , lv denied 92 NY2d 856 ; see also, People v Weston, 249 AD2d 496 , lv denied 92 NY2d 931 ; People v Riddick, 229 AD2d 453, 454 , lv denied 88 NY2d 993 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Thomas White, Also Known as Tommy White
v.
Thomas White, Also Known as Tommy White
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Apr 20, 1998.
Published
—Application by the appellant for a writ of error co-ram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated February 29, 1988 (People v White, 137 AD2d 859), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered May 17, 1984.
Ordered that the application is denied.
The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel (see, Jones v Barnes, 463 US 745). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Thompson and Sullivan, JJ., concur.