Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Desmond WILLIAMS, Appellant.

Decided: November 24, 1997

Before MILLER, J.P., and RITTER, ALTMAN and KRAUSMAN, JJ. Judith E. Permutt, Scarsdale, for appellant. Jeanine Pirro, District Attorney, White Plains (Mary E. Costello and Maryanne Luciano, of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Angiolillo, J.), rendered May 2, 1994, convicting him of rape in the first degree (five counts) and sodomy in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

 The defendant's contention that his conviction should be vacated because he was denied his right to a speedy trial pursuant to CPL 30.30 is without merit.   The trial court correctly concluded that the delays occasioned by the necessity of obtaining blood and saliva samples from the defendant and his two codefendants, performing the genetic tests, and obtaining the written results of those analyses were exceptional circumstances within the meaning of CPL 30.30(4)(g)(i) (see, People v. Washington, 43 N.Y.2d 772, 774, 401 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 372 N.E.2d 795).

 The trial court properly determined that an audiotape of a telephone call to the 911 emergency number placed by the victim shortly after the incident was admissible as an excited utterance (see, People v. Palmer, 237 A.D.2d 311, 655 N.Y.S.2d 380;  People v. Lewis, 222 A.D.2d 1058, 635 N.Y.S.2d 872;  see also, People v. Brown, 70 N.Y.2d 513, 522 N.Y.S.2d 837, 517 N.E.2d 515).   Moreover, the audiotape was properly authenticated (see, People v. Ely, 68 N.Y.2d 520, 527-528, 510 N.Y.S.2d 532, 503 N.E.2d 88).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.


Copied to clipboard