People v. Rollock

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (McKay, J.), rendered October 18, 1993, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the 10-year-old witness was able to appreciate the difference between the truth and a lie, and acknowledged her obligation to testify truthfully (see, People v Morales, 80 NY2d 450; People v Nisoff, 36 NY2d 560). Moreover, she indicated that she believes in God and that punishment from both God and the court is a consequence for lying, and she agreed to tell the truth while under oath (see, People v Davila, 223 AD2d 722; People v Velez, 212 AD2d 819; People v McDaniel, 165 AD2d 817, 818). Therefore, under the circumstances of this case, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by permitting the infant witness to give sworn testimony.