Opinion
March 29, 1999
Appeal from the judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (LaCava, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly permitted the People to read into evidence the felony hearing testimony of a missing witness pursuant to CPL 670.10. At the hearing regarding the admissibility of this testimony, two police officers testfied as to the extensive efforts made to locate the witness who escaped from police custody and has remained a fugitive. We are satisfied that it is very unlikely that any additional efforts would have resulted in locating the witness ( see, People v. Wiggins, 189 A.D.2d 908, 910; People v. Nucci, 162 A.D.2d 725).
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the testimony of the missing witness should not have been admitted since there was inadequate cross-examination at the felony hearing. The cross-examination of the witness was conducted by an experienced practitioner and was unrestricted by the hearing court. Thus, the defendant received a full and fair opportunity to cross-examine the witness ( see, People v. Arroyo, 54 N.Y.2d 567, 570-573, cert denied 456 U.S. 979). In addition, the hearing court properly determined that the witness's identification of the defendant shortly after the crime was merely confirmatory ( see, People v. Rodriguez, 79 N.Y.2d 445, 449-450).
S. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Joy, JJ., concur.