People v. Pontes

2018 NY Slip Op 4127
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 8, 2018
Docket394 KA 17-01663
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 4127 (People v. Pontes) 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. Pontes, 2018 NY Slip Op 4127 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

People v Pontes (2018 NY Slip Op 04127)
People v Pontes
2018 NY Slip Op 04127
Decided on June 8, 2018
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on June 8, 2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, NEMOYER, CURRAN, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.

394 KA 17-01663

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, APPELLANT,

v

HENRI PONTES, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.


SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DANIEL GROSS OF COUNSEL), FOR APPELLANT.

MICHAEL T. ANSALDI, ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.



Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Douglas A. Randall, J.), entered February 10, 2017. The order granted that part of defendant's omnibus motion seeking to dismiss the indictment.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law, that part of the omnibus motion seeking to dismiss the indictment is denied, the indictment is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to Monroe County Court for further proceedings on the indictment.

Memorandum: The People appeal from an order granting that part of defendant's omnibus motion seeking to dismiss an indictment charging her with identity theft in the first degree (Penal Law

§ 190.80 [3]) and second degree (§ 190.79 [2]). We now reverse the order, deny that part of the motion, and reinstate the indictment. We agree with the People that County Court erred in granting that part of the motion inasmuch as the evidence before the grand jury is legally sufficient to sustain the indictment (see People v Roberts, — NY3d &mdash, &mdash, 2018 NY Slip Op 03172 at *4-7 [2018]; People v Yuson, 133 AD3d 1221, 1221-1222 [4th Dept 2015], lv denied 27 NY3d 1157 [2016]; see generally People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523, 525-526 [1998]).

Entered: June 8, 2018

Mark W. Bennett

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Bello
705 N.E.2d 1209 (New York Court of Appeals, 1998)
People v. Roberts
31 N.Y.3d 406 (New York Court of Appeals, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 NY Slip Op 4127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pontes-nyappdiv-2018.