From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Christie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 27, 1994
210 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

December 27, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (R. Goldberg, J., Curci, J.).


Ordered that the judgment and the amended judgment are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly amended Indictment No. 1184/91 to read that the defendant and his codefendant not only acted in concert with each other, but that they also acted in concert with others. The amendment neither changed the theory of the People's case nor prejudiced the defendant (see, People v Guidice, 83 N.Y.2d 630; People v McEachin, 188 A.D.2d 433; People v Roseboro, 182 A.D.2d 784; People v Gaskin, 184 A.D.2d 525).

We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions, including the issue of whether the defendant's sentence is excessive, and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Christie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 27, 1994
210 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Christie

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID CHRISTIE…

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

Date published: Dec 27, 1994

Citations

210 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
620 N.Y.S.2d 990

Citing Cases

People v. Hyland

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the amendment of the indictment to reflect that the defendant and the…

People v. Hyland

The amendment was consistent with the initial theory, of which the defendant had notice, that he acted with…