People v. Shipp

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Shipp

324 N.E.2d 887, 35 N.Y.2d 982, 365 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 1703

DecidedJanuary 20, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 324 N.E.2d 887 (People v. Shipp) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Shipp, 324 N.E.2d 887, 35 N.Y.2d 982, 365 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 1703 (N.Y. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum. Under CPL 100.40 (subd. 1, par. [c]) “An information * • * * is sufficient on its face when * * * [the] Non-hearsay allegations of the factual part of the information and/or of any supporting depositions establish, if true, every element of the offense charged and the defendant’s commission thereof.” (Italics supplied.) (Compare People v. James, 4 N Y 2d 482; see, also, Pitler, New York Criminal Practice Under the CPL, p. 283.) The Appellate Term relying on the record before it, as indeed this court is bound to do, had to hold that the owner’s deposition, stating that the defendant did not have his consent to operate the car, could be considered together with the information and was sufficient to establish, by nonhearsay allegations, every element of the offense charged (Penal Law, 165.05). The defendant’s claim that this deposition was not before the trial court at the time the motion to dismiss was made should be raised by a motion pursuant to CPL article 440, if the defendant be so advised.

CMef Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

Memorandum. Under CPL 100.40 (subd. 1, par. [c]) “An information * • * * is sufficient on its face when * * * [the] Non-hearsay allegations of the factual part of the information and/or of any supporting depositions establish, if true, every element of the offense charged and the defendant’s commission thereof.” (Italics supplied.) (Compare People v. James, 4 N Y 2d 482; see, also, Pitler, New York Criminal Practice Under the CPL, p. 283.) The Appellate Term relying on the record before it, as indeed this court is bound to do, had to hold that the owner’s deposition, stating that the defendant did not have his consent to operate the car, could be considered together with the information and was sufficient to establish, by nonhearsay allegations, every element of the offense charged (Penal Law, 165.05). The defendant’s claim that this deposition was not before the trial court at the time the motion to dismiss was made should be raised by a motion pursuant to CPL article 440, if the defendant be so advised.

CMef Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

324 N.E.2d 887, 35 N.Y.2d 982, 365 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 1703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-shipp-ny-1975.