Majority
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the People failed to lay a proper foundation for the admission of a computerized time sheet reflecting the hours he worked on the night of his arrest, and that the Supreme Court thus erred in admitting the time sheet into evidence. Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court properly determined that the time sheet was a business record, that a proper foundation for its admission had been laid, and that it was, therefore, admissible in evidence (see CPLR 4518 [a]; CPL 60.10; People v Cratsley, 86 NY2d 81 , 89 [1995]; People v Kennedy, 68 NY2d 569 , 579-580 [1986]; People v Gecetchkori, 236 AD2d 556 , 556 [1997]). Hall, J.P., Roman, Sgroi and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Cratsley 86 NY2d 81 at 89 p. 734
- People v. Kennedy 68 NY2d 569 at 579-580 p. 734