
    PEOPLE of the State of New York, respondents, v. James HEFFRON, appellant.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
    July 28, 1916.)
    The testimony offered to show prior inconsistent statements of the witness Haslett was not,collateral to the issue. If competent, its importance was great. It was excluded expressly by the trial court upon an untenable theory. We think that the exclusion of this evidence worked injury to the defendant. Judgment of conviction and orders reversed, and a new trial granted.
   Thomas, Carr, Rich, and Putnam, JJ., concur. Jenks, P. J., not voting.  