In Hidad, the court found the allegation that an infant child was in the defendant's custody at the time when the defendant was a party to a drug transaction insufficient because there was no allegation of a dangerous action directed at the child.
Summary of this case from People v. JonesNo. 2007NY004149.
April 5, 2007.
Crimes Endangering Welfare of Child. Penal Law — § 260.10 (1) (Endangering welfare of child).
In Hidad, the court found the allegation that an infant child was in the defendant's custody at the time when the defendant was a party to a drug transaction insufficient because there was no allegation of a dangerous action directed at the child.
Summary of this case from People v. JonesFull title:The People of the State of New York v. Sara Hidad, Defendant
Court:Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County
Date published: Apr 5, 2007
(Penal Law § 260.10.) The defendant, citing People v Grajales ( 179 Misc 2d 793 [Crim Ct, Bronx County 1999])…
People v. AlvarezAt least one lower court has held that the "mere presence" of marihuana in a premises where children are…