People State New York v. Farris Cathey

[38 A.D.2d 976 Page 976] Defendant's conviction was for the stabbing death of a taxicab driver in Queens in January, 1970. The evidence linking him
with the crime, which included proof of flight and an exculpatory statement, was circumstantial. While proof of flight, by
itself, is weak evidence, it is probative and may be considered by a jury (People v. Yazum, 13 N.Y.2d 302). That evidence,
together with the other proof in this case, was, in our opinion, sufficient to convict. It is not necessary for each piece
of circumstantial evidence to point to no hypothesis but guilt, but the totality must. We would add too, that defendant's
statement was not entirely exculpatory. If it established nothing more, it placed defendant in the taxicab at the time the
fatal stabbing occurred. He stated he was asleep in the cab and that one of his companions gave all the directions to the
driver. Yet, the cab traveled from Manhattan to a point near where defendant resided in Queens. Defendant claimed his clothes
got bloody when the driver reached back to grab him as defendant pushed his companions out the rear door on the driver's side.
Despite our conclusion as to the sufficiency of the evidence, we direct a new trial because it was error to permit the prosecutor
to read to the trial jury the entire testimony of the witness Dorsey before the Grand Jury. This was done under the guise
of attacking Dorsey's credibility when, after being called by the People, he testified he could not remember his Grand Jury
testimony and, upon being shown the transcript, his recollection was not refreshed. The prosecutor read each and every question
and answer. The emphasis placed on it shows it was used as evidence-in-chief of defendant's guilt, not for impeachment purposes;
and, in view of the closeness of the case, the resulting verdict should not be permitted to stand (see People v. Price, 35
A.D.2d 1015).