From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cunningham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 7, 1994
201 A.D.2d 496 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

February 7, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cirigliano, J.).


Ordered that the appeal from the order dated March 24, 1993, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order entered May 28, 1993, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered May 28, 1993, is reversed insofar as appealed from, the order dated March 24, 1993, is vacated, the defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment is denied, and the indictment is reinstated.

An adult witness is presumed to be competent to testify (People v. Parks, 41 N.Y.2d 36, 45). In a Grand Jury proceeding it is for the Assistant District Attorney to resolve the issue of whether, by reason of mental disease or defect, an adult does not possess sufficient intelligence or capacity to justify the receipt of that person's testimony (see, CPL 60.20; 190.30 [6]). On the record before us, we find that there was no need for the Assistant District Attorney to conduct an inquiry into the adult complainant's capacity to testify. Thus, the Supreme Court erred in dismissing the indictment. Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Cunningham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 7, 1994
201 A.D.2d 496 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Cunningham

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. GREGORY CUNNINGHAM…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 7, 1994

Citations

201 A.D.2d 496 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
607 N.Y.S.2d 377