People v. Vincente
| Decision Date | 07 May 1992 |
| Citation | 583 N.Y.S.2d 573,183 A.D.2d 940 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Angel L. VINCENTE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Robert S. Wolf, New York City, for appellant.
Gerald F. Mollen, Dist. Atty. (Mary Anne Lehmann, of counsel), Binghamton, for respondent.
Before WEISS, P.J., and CREW, MAHONEY, CASEY and HARVEY, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Mathews, J.), rendered February 13, 1990, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree.
Following his plea of guilty to the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, defendant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 7 2/3 years to life. This term and defendant's plea to the lesser charge had been negotiated following a trial on the original charge of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, which trial resulted in a hung jury.
On his appeal, defendant contends (1) that the testimony of an accomplice offered before the Grand Jury was uncorroborated and that the District Attorney failed to instruct the Grand Jury, in violation of CPL 190.65(1), that corroboration of such testimony was required, and (2) that proof of uncharged crimes and hearsay evidence to demonstrate conspiratorial conduct on defendant's part was impermissibly presented to the Grand Jury. These two errors in the presentation of the case, defendant argues, infected the integrity of the Grand Jury proceeding to the extent of requiring dismissal of the indictment, notwithstanding defendant's guilty plea.
We disagree. The evidence before the Grand Jury was legally sufficient to support the indictment. The Grand Jury heard not only the testimony of the accomplice, Willie Sims, who turned police informant, as to the details of the drug sale transaction, it also heard the tape recording of a conversation between Sims and defendant in which defendant admitted knowing about the drug deal, and defendant's admission to a police officer as well as defendant's reference on the tapes to himself. Thus, the evidence before the Grand Jury, unexplained and uncontradicted, was legally sufficient to demonstrate all the elements of the crimes charged and defendant's connection with these crimes. The District Attorney's failure to instruct the Grand Jury about corroboration, that in any event was legally...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Fox
...evidence submitted more than satisfied the corroboration requirement. People v. Huston, 88 N.Y.2d 400, 409 (1996); see People v. Vincente, 183 A.D.2d 940 (3d Dept. 1992); People v. Lowery, 151 A.D.2d 1026 (4th Dept.), lv. denied, 75 N.Y.2d 772 (1989); People v. Philipp, 106 A.D.2d 681 (3d D......
-
People v. Meslin
...was supported by legally sufficient evidence (see, People v. Booden, 69 N.Y.2d 185, 513 N.Y.S.2d 87, 505 N.E.2d 598; People v. Vincente, 183 A.D.2d 940, 583 N.Y.S.2d 573), and the defendant's remaining claims regarding these issues are either unpreserved for appellate review or without Furt......
- People v. Wills