Legal Opinion

People v. Rosario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 22, 2009PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*601The trial court improperly admitted into evidence a prior consistent statement by the complainant, thereby allowing the impermissible bolstering of the complainant’s testimony (see People v McDaniel, 81 NY2d 10, 16 [1993]; People v McClean, 69 NY2d 426, 428 [1987]; People v Van Ness, 43 AD3d 553, 554-555 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 965 [2007]), an error that is especially prejudicial when the complainant’s credibility is the linchpin of a conviction. The note that the complainant wrote approximately one year before she made the accusation to the police cannot satisfy the “prompt outcry”…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. McDanielNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. People v. McCleanNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. People v. AllenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  4. People v. Van NessAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  5. People v. BanksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. RosarioNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
  2. People v. StoneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API