From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Carr

Court of Appeals of New York.
Oct 19, 2017
30 N.Y.3d 945 (N.Y. 2017)

Opinion

10-19-2017

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James L. CARR, Appellant.

Evan M. Lumley, Buffalo, for appellant. Michael J. Flaherty, Jr., Acting District Attorney, Buffalo (Nicholas T. Texido and Michael J. Hillery of counsel), for respondent.


Evan M. Lumley, Buffalo, for appellant.

Michael J. Flaherty, Jr., Acting District Attorney, Buffalo (Nicholas T. Texido and Michael J. Hillery of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

There was no error in the denial of defendant's motion to vacate the judgment. Under these circumstances, the People were not required to seek court permission under CPL 190.75(3) before presenting additional charges to a second grand jury. We do not pass upon whether a CPL 440.10 motion lies to bring this claim, as that question is not before us.

Chief Judge DIFIORE and Judges RIVERA, STEIN, GARCIA, WILSON and FEINMAN concur; Judge FAHEY taking no part.

Order affirmed, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Carr

Court of Appeals of New York.
Oct 19, 2017
30 N.Y.3d 945 (N.Y. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Carr

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James L. CARR…

Court:Court of Appeals of New York.

Date published: Oct 19, 2017

Citations

30 N.Y.3d 945 (N.Y. 2017)
64 N.Y.S.3d 658
86 N.E.3d 550

Citing Cases

People v. Owens

We agree with defendant that the People failed to seek leave pursuant to CPL 210.20 (4) to resubmit the…