PEOPLE v. DICKS (2012)

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Randy DICKS, Defendant–Appellant.

Decided: November 20, 2012

TOM, J.P., ANDRIAS, SAXE, ACOSTA, FREEDMAN, JJ.

Law Offices of Douglas G. Rankin, P.C., Brooklyn (Douglas G. Rankin of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Britta Gilmore of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Roger S. Hayes, J.), rendered April 29, 2011, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of bribery in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of six months of intermittent imprisonment to be served on weekends, unanimously affirmed.

Recordings of incriminating conversations between defendant and other persons were properly authenticated by participants' testimony that the recordings were accurate, complete and unaltered (see People v. Ely, 68 N.Y.2d 520, 527 [1986]; People v. Agudelo, 96 AD3d 611 [1st Dept 2012] ). Defendant's identity as a participant in the conversations was sufficiently established by the testimony of another participant, as well as the surrounding circumstances, including several face-to-face meetings that followed up on the recorded conversations. No chain-of-custody evidence was required (see People v. Ely, 68 N.Y.2d at 528), and since the contents of the tapes were not in dispute, the best evidence rule did not apply (see People v. Schozer v. William Penn Life Ins. Co., 84 N.Y.2d 639, 643 [1984] ).

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network