People v. Williams, 69 N.Y.2d 762 (1987)

A missing witness charge is warranted when an uncalled witness is knowledgeable about a material issue, expected to testify favorably to the opposing party, and the party fails to call them, unless the witness’s testimony would be merely cumulative, and there is evidence that the testimony would be inconsistent with other testimony.

Summary

Defendant was convicted of burglary and criminal mischief. He argued the trial court erred in denying his request for a missing witness charge regarding two police officers, Severe and Ruvio, who allegedly witnessed his interrogation. The Court of Appeals held that while a missing witness charge was appropriate for Detective Ruvio because his testimony wasn’t merely cumulative and might contradict other accounts, the error was ultimately harmless given the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt, including eyewitness testimony, a written statement, and a palm print at the scene.

Facts

Defendant was convicted of burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree. Detective D’Ambrosio testified that the defendant confessed to the burglary during a station house interrogation. D’Ambrosio’s trial testimony conflicted with his pretrial hearing testimony, where he indicated the defendant only