From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mitchell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 14, 1992
183 A.D.2d 503 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Summary

concluding that defendant's self-serving exculpatory statements to the police were inadmissible hearsay and because the grand jury may only consider evidence admissible at trial, the prosecution was not required to present the statements to the grand jury

Summary of this case from Indico v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of State

Opinion

May 14, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.).


Defendant admitted to arresting officers that she had fatally stabbed her husband. The knife was recovered by the police, and a medical examiner corroborated the cause of death. Based on this evidence, the grand jury returned an indictment charging manslaughter in the first degree. The sufficiency of evidence before the grand jury is not seriously challenged. Nonetheless, the court dismissed the indictment on the ground that defendant's exculpatory versions of the incident had not been presented to the grand jurors, nor had that jury been instructed on the law applicable to justification.

Defendant gave the police, and later the prosecutor, several contradictory versions of the incident: she admitted that she had stabbed her husband; she admitted stabbing her husband but claimed that he had attacked her; she claimed that the victim was accidentally stabbed during a struggle; and, finally, she twice denied stabbing the victim altogether. The grand jury heard evidence of only defendant's inculpatory admissions.

Criminal Term erred in concluding that the People were required to present any of defendant's separate exculpatory statements to the grand jury, because they constituted inadmissible hearsay. Evidence is admissible in the grand jury only if it would be admissible at trial (see, CPL 190.30). Defendant's self-serving exculpatory statements made outside of the courtroom are inadmissible hearsay (People v. Smalls, 111 A.D.2d 38, lv denied 65 N.Y.2d 987). Nothing in any of those statements, nor anything else in the record, provided a predicate for instructions on the law of justification in defendant's resort to the use of deadly force (Penal Law § 35.15).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Mitchell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 14, 1992
183 A.D.2d 503 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

concluding that defendant's self-serving exculpatory statements to the police were inadmissible hearsay and because the grand jury may only consider evidence admissible at trial, the prosecution was not required to present the statements to the grand jury

Summary of this case from Indico v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of State
Case details for

People v. Mitchell

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. PATSY MITCHELL…

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

Date published: May 14, 1992

Citations

183 A.D.2d 503 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
583 N.Y.S.2d 432

Citing Cases

People v. Mitchell

Supreme Court dismissed the indictment because the prosecutor did not provide the Grand Jury with defendant's…

People v. Kaplan

f the order dated July 28, 1992, as granted that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to…