PEOPLE v. FIGUEROA (1999)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frederic Berman, J.), rendered June 6, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first and second degrees and attempted robbery in the first and second degrees, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 10 to 20 years and 7 to 14 years on the robbery convictions, to run consecutively to concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years and 3 1/212 to 7 years on the attempted robbery convictions, unanimously affirmed.

 The court properly ruled that the reports prepared by the Probation Department in connection with the testifying co-indictee were not Rosario material because they were confidential documents not within the possession or control of the People (CPL 390.50[1];  People v. Morris, 153 A.D.2d 984, 545 N.Y.S.2d 427, lv. denied 75 N.Y.2d 922, 555 N.Y.S.2d 40, 554 N.E.2d 77;   People v. Mayers, 100 A.D.2d 558, 473 N.Y.S.2d 263, lv. denied 62 N.Y.2d 651, 476 N.Y.S.2d 1046, 464 N.E.2d 998).

 The court's preclusion of proposed testimony did not prevent defendant from presenting a defense.   Rather, the court properly exercised its discretion in precluding the proposed testimony, as collateral, in that defendant's offer of proof indicated that the testimony concerned only the general credibility of a prosecution witness (see, People v. Thomas, 46 N.Y.2d 100, 105, 412 N.Y.S.2d 845, 385 N.E.2d 584, appeal dismissed 444 U.S. 891, 100 S.Ct. 197, 62 L.Ed.2d 127).   Further, since the possible reason for the witness to fabricate was acknowledged by the witness, the proposed testimony would have been cumulative (see, People v. Brooks, 131 N.Y. 321, 326-327, 30 N.E. 189).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.