Opinion
December 24, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that since the defendant was holding the victim when the victim was stabbed by his codefendant, the evidence was legally sufficient to establish that the defendant shared his codefendant's intent to cause serious physical injury (see, Penal Law § 20.00; People v. Allah, 71 N.Y.2d 830, 832; People v. Whatley, 69 N.Y.2d 784, 785; People v. La Belle, 18 N.Y.2d 405, 412). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant further argues that the trial court violated the holding of Bruton v. United States ( 391 U.S. 123) by admitting into evidence a videotaped statement by his jointly tried codefendant. Although the original videotape statement did contain references to the defendant's presence at the scene, the trial court effectively redacted the tape by deleting any reference to the defendant's presence (see, People v. Wheeler, 62 N.Y.2d 867; People v. Smalls, 55 N.Y.2d 407). Additionally, the trial court properly instructed the jury that it could not use the tape in any way against the defendant (see, Richardson v. Marsh, 481 U.S. 200). Under these circumstances, the defendant's right of confrontation was not violated (see, People v. Brown, 158 A.D.2d 461; People v. Marcus, 137 A.D.2d 723). Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.