Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Lane Shelter, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2001-11-09
Citations: 288 A.D.2d 929
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lane Shelter, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 288
Pages: 929–930

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lane Shelter, Appellant.
[732 NYS2d 192]

Opinion:
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly exercised its discretion in admitting a statement of an off-duty police officer pursuant to the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. The statement was made contemporaneously with a startling event, i.e., within minutes of the officer's hav ing observed a burning vehicle and two men leaving the scene (see, Prince, Richardson on Evidence § 8-604 [Farrell 11th ed]; see also, People v Cotto, 92 NY2d 68, 78-79; People v Edwards, 47 NY2d 493, 497).
Contrary to defendant's contention, the court properly refused to give an expanded identification charge. No witness identified defendant as the perpetrator of the arson; rather, defendant's identity as the perpetrator was based upon circumstantial evidence. Thus, there was no issue concerning the evaluation of identification testimony and no basis for an expanded identification charge (see, People v Figueroa, 172 AD2d 387, lv denied 78 NY2d 922). The conviction is supported by legally sufficient evidence and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Marks, J. — Arson, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Wisner, Scudder, Burns and Gorski, JJ.