People v. Dackman, 42 N.Y.2d 1067 (1977)
A defendant’s failure to object to a trial court’s recognition of a witness’s claim of privilege against self-incrimination forfeits the right to appellate review of that specific error.
Summary
Dackman was convicted based on a drugstore robbery in which a participant, who had already pleaded guilty, was subpoenaed by the defense. This witness invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and refused to testify. The trial court did not allow the defendant to call the witness to the stand. The defendant did not object to the court’s decision regarding the witness’s privilege. On appeal, the defendant argued the witness should not have been allowed to invoke the privilege because he had already pleaded guilty. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant’s failure to object at trial precluded appellate review of the claim that the witness’s Fifth Amendment privilege was improperly recognized.
Facts
The defendant was charged with a crime based on his participation in a drugstore robbery.
A participant in the robbery pleaded guilty.
The defendant subpoenaed this participant as a witness, hoping for exculpatory testimony.
The witness, when examined outside the presence of the jury, invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and refused to testify.
The trial court ruled that the defendant could not call the witness to the stand, and defense counsel did not object.
The trial court then denied the defense’s request to inform the jury about the witness’s guilty plea and his reason for not appearing, a decision the defendant did not appeal.
Procedural History
The trial court convicted the defendant.
The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction.
The case was appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether a defendant, by failing to object to the trial court’s recognition of a witness’s claim of privilege against self-incrimination, preserves the alleged error for appellate review.
Holding
No, because the defendant failed to object to the trial court’s recognition of the claim of privilege or otherwise raise any question as to the witness’s right to assert such privilege, the error, if any, was not preserved for appellate review.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals emphasized that the defendant did not object to the trial court’s recognition of the witness’s Fifth Amendment claim. Because of this failure to object, the Court held that the issue of whether the witness was improperly allowed to invoke the privilege was not preserved for appellate review.
The Court acknowledged a potentially significant issue concerning the prosecution’s failure to grant immunity to the witness, which could have deprived the defendant of exculpatory testimony and potentially violated due process and the right to a fair trial (citing People v. Sapia, 41 NY2d 160). However, the Court clarified that this issue was neither preserved nor presented on appeal.
The Court stated, “In view of the failure of defendant to object to the trial court’s recognition of the claim of privilege or otherwise then to raise any question as to the witness’ right to assert such privilege, the error, if any, was not preserved for appellate review.”