People v. Gil

220 A.D.2d 328, 633 N.Y.S.2d 116, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10416
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 24, 1995·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Brenda Soloff, J.), entered April 25, 1994, dismissing the indictment charging defendant with criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree and related counts, unanimously affirmed.

A review of the minutes of the Grand Jury presentation supports the court’s finding that "Nothing other than defendant having been inside the apartment connects defendant to the apartment or the drugs, guns and paraphernalia. That fact alone is insufficient to allow the grand jury to find that defen[329]*329dant had dominion and control over the contents of the apartment”. Thus, the People did not meet their burden of presenting to the Grand Jury a prima facie case of criminal conduct by defendant (People v Jennings, 69 NY2d 103, 114). The instant facts are plainly distinguishable from those in People v Miranda (220 AD2d 218).

We note that the prosecutor did not instruct the grand jurors regarding the permissible statutory presumption of possession under Penal Law § 220.25 (2), which, in any event, is not applicable to these facts. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Asch, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

People v. Gil, 220 A.D.2d 328, 633 N.Y.S.2d 116, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10416 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

220 A.D.2d 328 (People v. Gil) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Key (Timothy)
2024 NY Slip Op 50285(U) (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Diaz
68 A.D.3d 642 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
People v. Mayo
59 A.D.3d 250 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)