Legal Opinion

People v. Khoi Dang

Criminal Court of the City of New York

Decided April 8, 1997PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Charles A. Posner, J.

The defendant, Khoi Dang, charged with criminal possession of an electronic stun gun, one of the proscribed weapons enumerated in Penal Law § 265.01 (1), moves to dismiss the *275purported information as facially insufficient. The questions presented by instant motion are twofold: (1) when a defendant is charged as such what factual allegations will suffice to render the complaint facially sufficient; and (2) what form of corroboration is required to convert the complaint to an information.

CORROBORATION OF THE OPERABILITY OF A STUN GUN

This court holds that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. AlejandroNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. People v. DumasNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. People v. LynchCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1989
  4. People v. MorelCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1993

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. BlackwellCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1998
  2. People v. IoannidisCriminal Court of the City of New York · 2006
  3. People v. KilhullenNew York Supreme Court · 2014
  4. People v. OctavioCriminal Court of the City of New York · 2011
  5. People v. Rivera (Gasper)Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API