People v. Tullo
This text of 313 N.E.2d 340 (People v. Tullo) 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.
Opinion
[714]*714. Memorandum. Venue was properly laid in Nassau County. GPL 20.40 (subd. 1, par. [a]) requires only that it be proved that conduct occurred within the county sufficient to establish one element of the offense. While venue may be established by a preponderance of the evidence (People v. Hetenyi, 304 N. Y. 80, 84) in this instance the trial court’s charge inadvertently called for a higher quantum of proof — beyond a reasonable doubt. On this record we agree with the Appellate Division that the jury was justified in finding, even under the more stringent standard, that defendant’s conduct in Nassau County was sufficient to establish that his intent to murder was formulated in that county.
We have examined defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Rabin and Stevens concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
313 N.E.2d 340, 34 N.Y.2d 712, 356 N.Y.S.2d 861, 1974 N.Y. LEXIS 1629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tullo-ny-1974.