People v. Barnes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Barnes

15 A.D.3d 195, 788 N.Y.S.2d 609, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 937

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 3, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 15 A.D.3d 195 (People v. Barnes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Barnes, 15 A.D.3d 195, 788 N.Y.S.2d 609, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 937 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd G. Goodman, J., on dismissal motion; Michael A. Corriero, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered May 1, 2002, convicting defendant of auto stripping in the second degree, petit larceny and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of IV2 to 3 years, and order, same court (Michael A. Corriero, J.), entered on or about August 30, 2002, which denied defendant’s CEL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment, unanimously affirmed.

Based on its review of the prosecutor’s affirmations and the grand jury minutes, the dismissal motion court properly concluded that the grand jury’s reconsideration of its “no true bill” was truly sua sponte within the meaning of People v Montanez (90 NY2d 690 [1997]). Defendant did not raise a factual issue requiring an evidentiary hearing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Ellerin, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd G. Goodman, J., on dismissal motion; Michael A. Corriero, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered May 1, 2002, convicting defendant of auto stripping in the second degree, petit larceny and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of IV2 to 3 years, and order, same court (Michael A. Corriero, J.), entered on or about August 30, 2002, which denied defendant’s CEL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment, unanimously affirmed.

Based on its review of the prosecutor’s affirmations and the grand jury minutes, the dismissal motion court properly concluded that the grand jury’s reconsideration of its “no true bill” was truly sua sponte within the meaning of People v Montanez (90 NY2d 690 [1997]). Defendant did not raise a factual issue requiring an evidentiary hearing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Ellerin, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.3d 195, 788 N.Y.S.2d 609, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-barnes-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack