People v. Kinred

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kinred

18 A.D.2d 1086, 239 N.Y.S.2d 439, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3989

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

DecidedApril 8, 1963

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 18 A.D.2d 1086 (People v. Kinred) 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. Kinred, 18 A.D.2d 1086, 239 N.Y.S.2d 439, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3989 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 17, 1962, which granted defendant’s motion and dismissed an indictment charging him with the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon as a felony (Penal Law, § 1897, subd. 1). Order reversed, on the law and the facts, motion denied, and indictment reinstated. In our opinion, the evidence presented to the Grand Jury was legally sufficient to establish a prima facie case of a violation of subdivision 1 of section 1897 of the Penal Law. “ In the clearest of terms the statute [Code Grim. Pro., § 251] states that the determination as to whether a trial jury would convict upon the evidence is specifically relegated by the Legislature to the judgment of the Grand Jury ” (People v. Peetz, 7 N Y 2d 147, 149). That a trial jury might not necessarily convict on this evidence is not our concern (People v. Eckert, 2 N Y 2d 126, 129). Furthermore, in view of the fact that the instrument or weapon possessed by the defendant, i.e., a 15 to 18-inch knife, is one which is specifically enumerated in subdivision 1 of section 1897 of the Penal Law, the possession thereof is presumptive evidence of unlawful intent, pursuant to the provisions of section [1087]*10871898 of the Penal Law (cf. People v. Adamkiewicz, 298 N. Y. 176; People v. Persce, 204 N. Y. 397). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 17, 1962, which granted defendant’s motion and dismissed an indictment charging him with the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon as a felony (Penal Law, § 1897, subd. 1). Order reversed, on the law and the facts, motion denied, and indictment reinstated. In our opinion, the evidence presented to the Grand Jury was legally sufficient to establish a prima facie case of a violation of subdivision 1 of section 1897 of the Penal Law. “ In the clearest of terms the statute [Code Grim. Pro., § 251] states that the determination as to whether a trial jury would convict upon the evidence is specifically relegated by the Legislature to the judgment of the Grand Jury ” (People v. Peetz, 7 N Y 2d 147, 149). That a trial jury might not necessarily convict on this evidence is not our concern (People v. Eckert, 2 N Y 2d 126, 129). Furthermore, in view of the fact that the instrument or weapon possessed by the defendant, i.e., a 15 to 18-inch knife, is one which is specifically enumerated in subdivision 1 of section 1897 of the Penal Law, the possession thereof is presumptive evidence of unlawful intent, pursuant to the provisions of section [1087]*10871898 of the Penal Law (cf. People v. Adamkiewicz, 298 N. Y. 176; People v. Persce, 204 N. Y. 397). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.2d 1086, 239 N.Y.S.2d 439, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3989, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kinred-nyappdiv-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack