People v. Day

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Day

291 A.D.2d 867, 737 N.Y.S.2d 727, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 958

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

DecidedFebruary 1, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 291 A.D.2d 867 (People v. Day) 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. Day, 291 A.D.2d 867, 737 N.Y.S.2d 727, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 958 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of Monroe County Court (Marks, J.), dated September 28, 2000, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law, the motion is denied, the indictment is reinstated and the matter is remitted to Monroe County Court for further proceedings on the indictment.

Memorandum: We agree with the People that County Court erred in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment based on legally insufficient evidence before the Grand Jury. “To dismiss an indictment on the basis of insufficient evidence before a Grand Jury, a reviewing court must consider ‘whether the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the People, if unexplained and uncontradicted, would warrant conviction by a petit jury ” (People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523, 525). Here, the single-count indictment charged defendant with criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39 [1]). The grand jury could have inferred that the “exchange” between defendant and the alleged buyer observed by the police was in fact a drug transaction in violation of the crime charged. Present — Pine, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from an order of Monroe County Court (Marks, J.), dated September 28, 2000, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law, the motion is denied, the indictment is reinstated and the matter is remitted to Monroe County Court for further proceedings on the indictment.

Memorandum: We agree with the People that County Court erred in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment based on legally insufficient evidence before the Grand Jury. “To dismiss an indictment on the basis of insufficient evidence before a Grand Jury, a reviewing court must consider ‘whether the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the People, if unexplained and uncontradicted, would warrant conviction by a petit jury ” (People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523, 525). Here, the single-count indictment charged defendant with criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39 [1]). The grand jury could have inferred that the “exchange” between defendant and the alleged buyer observed by the police was in fact a drug transaction in violation of the crime charged. Present — Pine, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 A.D.2d 867, 737 N.Y.S.2d 727, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 958, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-day-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack