People v. Boyko

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Boyko

19 A.D.3d 432, 795 N.Y.S.2d 899

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

DecidedJune 6, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.3d 432 (People v. Boyko) 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. Boyko, 19 A.D.3d 432, 795 N.Y.S.2d 899 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the People (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.), dated November 4, 2002, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment, and (2), as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the same court dated November 26, 2002, as, upon reargument, adhered to the prior determination and denied that branch of their motion which was for leave to submit the charges to another grand jury.

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated November 4, 2002, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated November 26, 2002, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated November 26, 2002, is affirmed insofar as appealed from.

Contrary to the People’s contention, the evidence before the grand jury was not legally sufficient to establish the offenses charged or any other lesser-included offense (see CPL 210.20 [1] [b]; cf. People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523 [1998]). Further, the court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the People’s motion which was for leave to submit the charges to another grand jury (see CPL 210.20 [4]; People v Morris, 93 [433]*433NY2d 908 [1999]). Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the People (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.), dated November 4, 2002, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment, and (2), as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the same court dated November 26, 2002, as, upon reargument, adhered to the prior determination and denied that branch of their motion which was for leave to submit the charges to another grand jury.

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated November 4, 2002, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated November 26, 2002, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated November 26, 2002, is affirmed insofar as appealed from.

Contrary to the People’s contention, the evidence before the grand jury was not legally sufficient to establish the offenses charged or any other lesser-included offense (see CPL 210.20 [1] [b]; cf. People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523 [1998]). Further, the court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the People’s motion which was for leave to submit the charges to another grand jury (see CPL 210.20 [4]; People v Morris, 93 [433]*433NY2d 908 [1999]). Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.3d 432, 795 N.Y.S.2d 899, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-boyko-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack