Legal Opinion

People v. Arena

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

Decided December 15, 1978PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Hancock, Jr., J.

The question presented is whether the authenticating testimony of a participant in a conversation can, without additional proof, establish a sufficient foundation for the admission of a tape of the conversation. We hold that under the circumstances in this case such testimony is sufficient.

A jury has convicted defendant, Leo Arena, of attempted grand larceny by extortion and attempted coercion in connection with an effort to "shake down” Daniel Hartnett, the proprietor of a massage parlor. The main item of evidence against the defendant was a tape recording…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. People v. ConnellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
  2. United States v. McKeeverDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1958
  3. People v. LubowNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
  4. Amaro v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. People v. FeldNew York Court of Appeals · 1953

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. ElyNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. People v. GiglioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  3. People v. RodriguezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  4. In Re Hunter Studios, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API