State v. Pelillo

The issues in this case are whether an indictment for the sale of a controlled drug must specify the capacity in which defendant is claimed to have acted and whether the failure of the trial judge to give the same jury instruction as in a previous case, when defendant was relying thereon, is cause for a new trial.

The indictment on which defendant was put to trial read in part that he “did knowingly sell a quantity of a controlled drug . . . without first obtaining a license so to do.” He was found guilty by a jury on January 21, 1976, and moved for a new trial on the ground that although the…