People v. Di Masi (15 A.D.2d 823, 1962)

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 any evidence which may be adduced with respect to said codefendant’s statement. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.