People v. Ganett
The People of the State of New York v. Sabu Ganett
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
*993 OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the indictment was a blank authorization permitting the police to arrest any person whom they might choose is wholly without merit. It is obvious that the Grand Jury intended to indict the specific person who sold heroin to Petronella on March 12, 1976, that person having been identified to the Grand Jury as “Sabu Ganett”. This was the only reasonable interpretation to be drawn from the Grand Jury testimony of Petronella.
In these circumstances it was error for the trial court to deny the motion of the People to amend the indictment to substitute the name of Sabu Gary, the true name of the defendant, for Sabu Ganett.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(where side bar conferences were conducted with potential jurors in defendant’s absence, “defendant failed to demonstrate ... any prejudice.”)
Cited by 29 cases
View all citing references →- Federal District Courts2
- State Highest Courts6
- State Appellate Courts19
- State Trial Courts1
- State Specialty Courts1
Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.