People v. Finley
| Decision Date | 20 August 1984 |
| Citation | 479 N.Y.S.2d 63,104 A.D.2d 450 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Appellant, v. Steven FINLEY, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
John J. Santucci, Dist. Atty., Kew Gardens (Michael J. Connolly, Richard G. Denzer and Malvina Nathanson, Kew Gardens, of counsel), for appellant.
Albert A. Gaudelli, for respondent (no brief filed).
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and TITONE, MANGANO and LAWRENCE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 24, 1980, which granted that branch of defendant's motion which sought dismissal of the indictment charging him with murder in the second degree (two counts), robbery in the first degree (two counts), and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.
Order reversed, on the law and the facts and as a matter of discretion, the aforenoted branch of defendant's pretrial motion denied, indictment reinstated, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings.
After an in camera inspection of the Grand Jury minutes, that branch of defendant's motion which sought dismissal of the indictment was denied by Justice EIBER, who expressly found "that sufficient legal evidence was adduced to sustain the indictment and that the legal instructions and manner of presentation of the People's case to the Grand Jury was in accordance with the law". Thereafter, a Wade hearing was conducted before Justice BROWNE which resulted in a finding that "there has been no violation of the constitutional rights of this defendant as regards his identification or the procedure utilized in identifying him". Nonetheless, Justice BROWNE entertained an application to re-inspect the Grand Jury minutes and to dismiss the indictment in the interest of justice (CPL 210.40), and directed dismissal both in the interest of justice and on the ground that the evidence was legally insufficient. We reverse.
Justice EIBER's determination that the evidence before the Grand Jury was legally sufficient to sustain the indictment constituted the law of the case at Criminal Term and, absent exceptional circumstances, not present here, was binding on Justice BROWNE as a judge of co-ordinate jurisdiction (see Vanguard Tours v. Town of Yorktown, App.Div., 477 N.Y.S.2d 40; People v. Hartigan, 90 A.D.2d 506, 454 N.Y.S.2d 890; People v. Wright, 104 Misc.2d 911, 914, 429 N.Y.S.2d 993; cf. People v. Leone, 44 N.Y.2d 315, 320-321, 405 N.Y.S.2d 642, 376 N.E.2d 1287 ). While Justice EIBER's determination would not constitute the law of the case in this court (People v. Hartigan, supra ), we agree with her that the indictment should stand.
The eyewitness testimony was sufficient to establish a prima facie case for Grand Jury purposes (People v. Mayo, 36 N.Y.2d 1002, 374 N.Y.S.2d 609, 337 N.Y.S.2d 124; People v. Makatura,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Ohrenstein
...grand jury, for such proof raises, at most, "[q]uestions of witness credibility * * * for the trier of fact * * *." (People v. Finley, 104 A.D.2d 450, 451, 479 N.Y.S.2d 63; accord, People v. Deegan, 69 N.Y.2d 976, 979, 516 N.Y.S.2d 651, 509 N.E.2d 345; People v. Warner-Lambert Co., 51 N.Y.2......
-
People v. Russo
...320 N.E.2d 625; People v. Root, 68 A.D.2d 8, 11, 416 N.Y.S.2d 269), it has been held to be applicable in criminal proceedings (People v. Finley, 104 A.D.2d 450, case 15, 479 N.Y.S.2d 63; Eugene Gold v. Hugh F. McShane, 74 A.D.2d 860, case 3, 426 N.Y.S.2d 504; People v. Watson, 57 A.D.2d 143......
-
People v. Johnson
...The prior determination constituted the law of the case and was binding upon any judge of coordinate jurisdiction (see, People v. Finley, 104 A.D.2d 450, 479 N.Y.S.2d 63, adhered to on rearg. 107 A.D.2d 709, 484 N.Y.S.2d 63; People v. Hartigan, 90 A.D.2d 506, 454 N.Y.S.2d 890). Although thi......
-
People v. Sanders
...People v. Herriot, 110 A.D.2d 851, 488 N.Y.S.2d 251 People v. Bigelow, 106 A.D.2d 448, 449-450, 482 N.Y.S.2d 541; People v. Finley, 104 A.D.2d 450, 451, 479 N.Y.S.2d 63, adhered to on rearg. 107 A.D.2d 709, 484 N.Y.S.2d 63; People v. Dukes, 97 A.D.2d 445, 467 N.Y.S.2d 287, lv. denied 61 N.Y......