Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
As there was no evidence that a certain witness for the prosecution "may reasonably be considered to have participated in (a) The offense charged; or (b) An offense based upon the same or some of the same facts or conduct which constitute the offense charged" (CPL 60.22 [2]), the trial court did not err in refusing to charge the jury that that witness was an accomplice as a matter of law (see, People v Jones,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.