THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. MICHAEL BRYANT DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2010)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:  On appeal from a judgment convicting him of, inter alia, burglary in the first degree (Penal Law § 140.30[1] ), defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in admitting certain evidence at trial because it was obtained directly or indirectly in violation of his physician-patient privilege (see CPLR 4504[a] ).   We reject that contention.  “[E]ven if there was a violation of the physician-patient privilege, the suppression of the evidence found as a result is not required.   The physician-patient privilege is based on statute, not the State or Federal Constitution ․ [and] a violation of a statute does not, without more, justify suppressing the evidence to which that violation leads” (People v. Greene, 9 NY3d 277, 280;  see People v. Drayton, 56 AD3d 1278, 1278-1279, appeal dismissed 13 NY3d 902).   The further contention of defendant that the court improperly limited his cross-examination of a prosecution witness is also without merit.  “It is well settled that ‘[t]he scope of cross-examination is within the sound discretion of the trial court’ (People v. Baker, 294 A.D.2d 888, 889, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 708).   Here, the record establishes that defendant was given wide latitude in cross-examining the witnessin question, and the court limited the cross-examination in merely a single instance that could not have affected the outcome of the trial.

Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court