The following excerpt is from People v. Johnson, 689 N.Y.S.2d 689, 711 N.E.2d 967, 93 N.Y.2d 254 (N.Y. 1999):
After defendant was arrested, the victim testified before the Grand Jury, in detail, about her relationship with defendant. She also testified at a suppression hearing, as a witness for the defense. When called at trial, however, she had "nothing to say" and otherwise refused to testify. The trial Judge refused the prosecutor's request to hold her in contempt. The next day, the People moved to have her Grand Jury testimony admitted in lieu of trial testimony. The Judge offered the People a hearing, which they declined as unnecessary. As the People explained to the court, the trial and suppression hearing evidence as well as a letter written by the victim (not admitted into evidence at trial) demonstrated that defendant had procured the witness's silence. Defense counsel argued against the People's application. Upon the Judge's announcement that he would grant the relief sought based solely on the People's submissions, defense counsel requested a Sirois hearing (see, Matter of Holtzman v. Hellenbrand and Sirois, 92 A.D.2d 405, 415, 460 N.Y.S.2d 591; see also, People v. Geraci, 85 N.Y.2d 359, 363 n. 1, 625 N.Y.S.2d 469, 649 N.E.2d 817). The Judge denied defense counsel's request, holding that counsel had acquiesced in the People's method of proceeding on the motion. The court then found that defendant had silenced this witness as a result of the "strong pressure exerted" on her.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.