People v. Leto
| Decision Date | 26 April 1973 |
| Citation | 342 N.Y.S.2d 901,41 A.D.2d 877 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Charles J. LETO, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Arnold W. Proskin, Albany County Dist. Atty., Albany (John A. Williamson, Jr., Albany, of counsel), for appellant.
William J. Gray, Albany (Joseph Harris, Albany, of counsel), for respondent.
Before HERLIHY, P.J., and STALEY, GREENBLOTT, SWEENEY and KANE, JJ.
Appeal from an order of the County Court of Albany County, entered July 3, 1972, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss certain indictments.
During the winter of 1969--1970, defendant contracted with the City of Albany for the purpose of providing equipment and services for snow removal. In March, 1971 the District Attorney of Albany County was conducting an investigation concerning contracts and snow removal business of the City of Albany during the 1969--1970 winter season. Defendant was served with a personal subpoena and a subpoena duces tecum which required him to produce before the Grand Jury all cash receipts and disbursements ledgers, purchasing vouchers, journals, general ledgers, all pay records, including employees' time and attendance records, all property inventory records, all bills and invoices, bank statements and cancelled checks and motor vehicle dispatching records relating to transactions occurring between November 1, 1969 and March 30, 1970.
The defendant appeared on March 17, 1971 and was asked to sign a waiver of immunity, which he refused. He was thereafter taken before the Grand Jury where he testified and turned over to the Grand Jury all his records called for by the subpoena duces tecum. On May 26, 1971 he was indicted on two charges of violating section 175.35 of the Penal Law and two charges of violating section 155.35 of the Penal Law relating to the filing of false claims for his contract work.
Defendant moved to dismiss the indictments on the ground that he was a target of the investigation and a prospective defendant and that, by reason of his testimony before the Grand Jury, he obtained immunity, which motion was granted, 70 Misc.2d 218, 334 N.Y.S.2d 303.
It is well settled that a person who is a possible defendant or 'target' of a Grand Jury investigation should not be called as a witness in the Grand Jury proceeding and, if he is called and testifies without waiving immunity, no evidence given by him may be subsequently used against him...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Vinegra
...v. Kreps, 349 F.Supp. 1049 (W.D.Wis.1972), and People v. Leto, 70 Misc.2d 218, 334 N.Y.S.2d 303 (Cty.Ct.1972), aff'd 41 A.D.2d 877, 342 N.Y.S.2d 901 (App.Div.1973). They do not persuade us. We hold, for the reasons expressed in United States v. Blue, supra, at dismissal of the charges conta......
-
People v. Slade
...was violated at the grand jury stage (see 70 Misc.2d 218, 220, 334 N.Y.S.2d 303 [Albany County Ct. 1972], aff'd 41 A.D.2d 877, 342 N.Y.S.2d 901 [3d Dept. 1973] ; compare People v. Mayes, 19 Misc.3d 48, 51, 858 N.Y.S.2d 856 [App. Term, 2d Dept., 9th & 10th Jud. Dists. 2008], lv denied 10 N.Y......
- A & R Const. Co., Inc. v. Gorlin-Okun, Inc.
-
Tyrone S., Matter of
...proceedings need not even invoke the constitutional privilege where he has indicated a refusal to waive immunity (cf. People v. Leto, 41 A.D.2d 877, 342 N.Y.S.2d 901; People v. Laino, 10 N.Y.2d 161, 218 N.Y.S.2d 647, 176 N.E.2d Clearly the co-perpetrator now imprisoned awaiting trial for th......