People v. Reddy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Reddy

73 A.D.2d 977, 424 N.Y.S.2d 238, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9918

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 73 A.D.2d 977 (People v. Reddy) 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. Reddy, 73 A.D.2d 977, 424 N.Y.S.2d 238, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9918 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered December 18, 1978, convicting him of murder in the second degree, manslaughter in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Prior to this trial, the trial court amended the indictment to delete the name of the codefendant, who had previously been acquitted of the instant charges. It cannot be said that this amendment of the indictment prejudiced defendant in his defense on the merits or altered the theory of the People’s case (see CPL 200.70; People v Trimm, 29 AD2d 83; cf. People v Boyd, 59 AD2d 558). Therefore the amendment was proper. We have considered defendant’s remaining points and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Cohalan, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered December 18, 1978, convicting him of murder in the second degree, manslaughter in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Prior to this trial, the trial court amended the indictment to delete the name of the codefendant, who had previously been acquitted of the instant charges. It cannot be said that this amendment of the indictment prejudiced defendant in his defense on the merits or altered the theory of the People’s case (see CPL 200.70; People v Trimm, 29 AD2d 83; cf. People v Boyd, 59 AD2d 558). Therefore the amendment was proper. We have considered defendant’s remaining points and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Cohalan, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.2d 977, 424 N.Y.S.2d 238, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reddy-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack