PEOPLE v. KELLER (1999)

 Defendant was convicted of grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30[4] ) and petit larceny (Penal Law § 155.25) as the result of a purse-snatching in a supermarket parking lot.   At trial the owner of the purse and another witness testified that they observed the license number of the vehicle used to flee the scene and contacted police.   The investigating police officer testified that he located the registered owner of the vehicle and asked her what relationship, if any, she had to defendant.   Over defendant's objection, the officer was permitted to testify that the owner responded that defendant is her grandson.   That statement was not pedigree information.   Thus, Supreme Court erred in admitting the statement of the owner pursuant to the exception to the hearsay rule for statements of pedigree and family history.   In any event, in view of the overwhelming evidence identifying defendant as the perpetrator of the crime, any error in admitting the hearsay statement is harmless (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787).

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: