People v. Daniels

I am to affirm but on a more narrow ground.

The very limited question posed on this appeal is whether the presence of the drugs in the Daniels’ apartment could be considered "evidence tending to connect” the defendants with the commission of the crime so as to corroborate the accomplice’s testimony (CPL 60.22, subd 1). The defendants argue that this simply established the corpus delicti, which we have held to be insufficient corroborative proof (People v Maione, 284 NY 423). But here the police officers’ testimony went far beyond that. Not only did they establish the corpus delicti, but they…