From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Miles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 10, 1995
220 A.D.2d 254 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

October 10, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Corriero, J.).


The hearsay nature of the lab report presented to the Grand Jury as proof that the substance defendant was charged with selling and possessing contained cocaine did not render the indictment jurisdictionally defective ( see, People v. Iannone, 45 N.Y.2d 589, 600-601). Accordingly, defendant waived his right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence by pleading guilty to a lesser included offense ( People v. Pelchat, 62 N.Y.2d 97, 108; People v. Phillips, 201 A.D.2d 255, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 914). Nor does defendant show how he was prejudiced by the People's failure to file timely copies of the report in accordance with CPL 190.30 (2-a) ( see, People v. Patterson, 161 Misc.2d 493), or how this technical defect otherwise impaired the integrity of the Grand Jury process ( see, People v. Pelchat, supra).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Kupferman, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Miles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 10, 1995
220 A.D.2d 254 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Miles

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. NATHANIEL MILES…

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

Date published: Oct 10, 1995

Citations

220 A.D.2d 254 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 74

Citing Cases

Rashid v. Kuhlman

The odds of success of a challenge based on the laboratory reports submitted to the grand jury were almost…

People v. Stanzoni

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. Appellate review of the issues which the defendant presently raises…