People v. Rodriguez
Opinion of the Court
Defendant, testifying in his own behalf, admitted breaking into the car, but asserted that he had found the credit cards on top of a garbage can in the vicinity.
The People’s evidence rebutting defendant’s testimony on cross-examination that he did not ask for money in exchange for the credit cards was of collateral importance (cf., People v Harris, 57 NY2d 335, 345, cert denied 460 US 1047), but did not depart substantially from defendant’s own testimony, and we discern no significant prejudice as a result of its admission (compare, People v McCann, 90 AD2d 554). While it was improper for the trial prosecutor to call defendant a liar and to suggest that he tailored his testimony (People v Martin, 172 AD2d 268; People v World, 157 AD2d 567) in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, these errors, even viewed cumulatively, do not warrant reversal. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Kupferman, Ross and Smith, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.