## Facts

- George Taylor was tried on a single indictment charging crimes against two victims in separate Bronx apartment attacks.
- On February 24, 1987, an assailant forced entry into Clara B.’s apartment at gunpoint and raped and sodomized her.
- On March 2, 1987, an assailant entered Elizabeth G.’s apartment at knifepoint, sexually abused her, and attempted to rape her.
- Taylor was arrested on March 13, 1987, and each victim identified him in separate lineups and again in court; Taylor testified and denied involvement.
- A neighbor later saw a man at Clara B.’s door using the false name the rapist had been given; the neighbor and her mother wrote down most of the man’s license plate number and relayed it by phone to a detective.
- The detective wrote the reported plate on a phone message slip and added a digit so the number corresponded to Taylor’s registration.
- By trial, the neighbor and her mother no longer had their written note and could not recall the plate number; the detective could identify his handwriting but could not remember the specific call or whether he verified accuracy with the caller.
- The trial court admitted the phone message slip as a past recollection recorded and also admitted an uncertified copy of Taylor’s vehicle registration.
- After the jury convicted Taylor on the charged counts, but before sentencing, he pleaded guilty to other sex offense charges under an agreement for concurrent sentencing.

## Issues

1. Whether a detective’s phone message slip containing a license plate number was admissible under the hearsay exception for past recollection recorded when neither the observer nor the recorder could verify the accuracy of the recorded number.
2. Whether the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of renunciation for the attempted rape of Elizabeth G.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of New York held that admission of the phone message slip as a past recollection recorded was improper.
- The court held that admission of an uncertified copy of Taylor’s vehicle registration was also error.
- The court reversed the rape and sodomy convictions involving Clara B. and ordered a new trial on those counts because the combined evidentiary errors required reversal.
- The court held the trial court correctly denied Taylor’s request for a renunciation jury instruction on the attempted rape of Elizabeth G.

## Legal Principles

- A writing may be admitted as past recollection recorded only when the foundational proof establishes that it was made or adopted when the event was fresh in memory and accurately reflects the witness’s knowledge at that time.
- General testimony about routine accuracy is insufficient if the recorder cannot recall the specific event or verification steps and the source witness cannot attest to the recorded statement’s accuracy.
- Uncertified official documents offered to prove matters such as vehicle registration are inadmissible absent a proper foundation.
- A defendant is entitled to a renunciation instruction on an attempt charge only if there is a reasonable view of the evidence that the defendant voluntarily and completely abandoned the criminal purpose and manifested that abandonment as required by statute.

## Conclusion

The court required strict foundational proof for recorded recollection and rejected a renunciation charge absent evidentiary support, reversing the Clara B. rape and sodomy counts for a new trial due to improperly admitted recorded-recollection and registration evidence while leaving the Elizabeth G. attempt-related rulings undisturbed.


People v. Taylor, 80 N.Y.2d 1, 598 N.E.2d 693 (N.Y. 1992)