The Rosario issue raised on this appeal is whether a ballistics examination request form, involving a handgun allegedly discarded by defendant while the police were in hot pursuit, was furnished to the defense prior to the cross-examination of the arresting officer whose statement was allegedly contained in the ballistics form. Because the record is not clear as to whether the form was produced, a hearing is necessary on this limited issue.
At trial the prosecutor stated that he had no knowledge as to the existence of the ballistics form. Therefore, the People did not waive their right, as appellant contends, to challenge the request on the ground that the form was duplicative of other materials produced. (See, People v. Quinones, 139 A.D.2d 404, 407.)
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ross, Milonas, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.