Opinion
IND. # 2016-255
10-24-2016
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK v. GERSON SOSA
TO: THOMAS P. ZUGIBE, ESQ. District Attorney of Rockland County JAMES CREAN, ESQ.
DECISION & ORDER
The defendant has moved by omnibus motion, dated September 12, 2016 for various forms of pre-trial relief The People filed an affirmation in opposition. The motion is decided as follows:
A. Grand Jury Minutes/Dismissal of Indictment
Pursuant to the defendant's motion to inspect and review, the Court, in camera, reviewed the presentation of evidence and legal instructions to the Grand Jury in order to determine the legal sufficiency of that presentation.
This Court has reviewed the evidence presented and finds that the presentation was legally sufficient to support the charges within the indictment. Viewing the evidence in the light must favorable to the People, and allowing for all reasonable inferences to be drawn from the evidence, the People have presented evidence that makes out a prima facie case for each crime charged. See generally People v. Swamp, 84 N.Y.2d 725 (1995); People v. Manini, 79 N.Y.2d 561 (1992); People v. Deegan, 69 N. Y.2d 969 (1987); People v. Mayo, 36 N.Y.2d 1002 (1975).
The Grand Jury was adequately instructed on the law with respect to the crimes charged and the attendant legal concepts . People v. Calbud, 49 N.Y.2d 389 (1980); People v. Hillaire, 270 A.D.2d 359 (2nd Dep't 2000). There were no defects in the presentation of evidence that warrant dismissing the indictment. People v. Huston, 88 N.Y.2d 400 (1996).
The defendant's motion for disclosure of the Grand Jury minutes is also denied. In the Matter of the Attorney General of the State of New York v. Firetog, 94 N.Y.2d 477 (2000).
B. Suppression of Statements
The defendant's motion is granted insofar as a hearing will be held immediately prior to trial to determine the admissibility of any statements.
C. Sandoval/Ventimiglia
The defendant's motion is granted insofar as a hearing will be held immediately prior to trial to determine the admissibility of any prior criminal or bad acts which the People seek to use in their direct case or use in the cross-examination of the defendant. At least one day prior to the hearing, the People are to provide counsel for the defendant with an itemized list of prior convictions and/or bad acts they will seek to introduce on their direct case or utilize in cross examining the defendant.
D. Bill of Particulars
The bill of particulars supplied by the People is sufficient. See, e.g., People v. Davis, 41 N.Y.2d 678 (1977). The bill of particulars together with the voluntary disclosure form adequately clarify the pleadings to apprise the defendant of the conduct constituting the crimes charged. Id.
E. Discovery and Inspection
The People's response to the defendant's request for discovery and inspection is sufficient. C.P.L. §240.20.
This Decision shall constitute the Order of the Court. Dated: New City, New York
October 24, 2016
ENTER
/s/_________
WILLIAM A. KELLY
J.S.C. TO: THOMAS P. ZUGIBE, ESQ.
District Attorney of Rockland County
JAMES CREAN, ESQ.