Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. Morel

Criminal Court of the City of New York

Decided February 19, 1993PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

William Garnett, J.

Can the prosecution file a superseding information which includes both new factual material and additional charges?

On November 9, 1992, the defendant was arrested for the alleged theft, possession and use of a stolen car and possession of an electronic stun gun which was found on the front floor of the automobile. Inexplicably, the defendant was only charged with possession of the stun gun. (Penal Law § 265.01 [1].) No facts were pleaded which would have provided a factual predicate for any charges concerning the car.

On January 22, 1993, over four months…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. People v. AlejandroNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. People v. CadeNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. People v. TwineCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1983
  4. People v. Cibro Oceana Terminal Corp.Criminal Court of the City of New York · 1990
  5. People v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.Criminal Court of the City of New York · 1992

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. GreenNassau County District Court · 2002
  2. People v. Khoi DangCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1997
  3. People v. HenryCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1995
  4. People v. GeraldinoCriminal Court of the City of New York · 2007
  5. People v. SimmonsRochester City Court · 1999

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API