People v. Di Masi

Defendant contends, inter alia, that the introduction into evidence of a codefendant’s statement inculpating him was prejudicial and deprived him of a fair trial, even though the trial court thereafter instructed the jury that the statement was binding upon the declarant only, and not binding upon the defendant (cf. People v. Lombard, 4 A D 2d 666 ; People v. Copeland, 12 A D 2d 942 ; People v. Schwarz, 10 A D 2d 17 ; People v. Feolo, 282 N. Y. 276 ; People v. La Ruffa, 2 A D 2d 765 ). We do not now pass upon the merits of this contention since we believe that in any event, under all the circumstances, a new trial should be had in the interests of justice. Upon the new trial the trial court will be in a better position, in the light of the authorities cited, to determine the admissibility of