It was an abuse of discretion to deny defendant's request for a reasonable expenditure to test whether a voice on a tape offered in evidence, in which defendant allegedly admitted the crime, was in fact defendant's (see, Johnson v. Harris, 682 F.2d 49, 50-51, cert denied 459 U.S. 1041). Defendant established extraordinary circumstances justifying compensation for the test (County Law § 722-c; see, People v. Gallow, 171 A.D.2d 1061, 1062, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 995), the results of which could have severely damaged the victim's credibility (compare, People v. Williams, 160 A.D.2d 754, affd 77 N.Y.2d 949). A preliminary hearing must then be held to determine the scientific reliability of the test should the expert conclude that the voice on the tape was not defendant's (see, People v. Jeter, 80 N.Y.2d 818, 821). Of course, the expert must, in the first instance supervise the creation of the defendant's voice exemplar.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Kupferman, JJ.