We agree with the motion court's determination ( 168 Misc.2d 182) that the extraordinary sanction of dismissal was not warranted for the People's delayed disclosure, in violation ofBrady v. Maryland ( 373 U.S. 83), of two possibly exculpatory statements of a witness. In any event, the statements were disclosed six months prior to trial and defendant knew of the witness's identity by the time of defendant's indictment. We find that any prejudice to defendant resulting from the delay was prevented by the court's curative actions, including severance and admission into evidence of the otherwise inadmissible hearsay statements with an appropriate adverse inference instruction (see, People v. Kelly, 62 N.Y.2d 516).
The trial court properly admitted, as a past recollection recorded, a statement given by another witness and reduced to writing by an interviewing detective. Contrary to defendant's arguments, the record establishes that the witness testified to a current lack of memory of the recorded information, the accuracy of which was established by the combined testimony of the witness and transcribing detective (see, People v. Taylor, 80 N.Y.2d 1, 8-9).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.