Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. James

Criminal Court of the City of New York

Decided March 9, 1988PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Martin G. Karopkin, J.

The defendant’s motion to dismiss the accusatory instrument on the grounds of legal insufficiency is hereby granted.

The defendant is charged with Penal Law § 220.03, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree. Recently, the criminal courts have differed over whether a laboratory finding of "residue” is sufficient to sustain this charge.

*921In deciding a motion to dismiss on the grounds of facial insufficiency, it is first necessary to consider the governing statutory requirements of CPL 100.15 and 100.40. The former requires an…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. People v. AlejandroNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. People v. DumasNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. People v. ReismanNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
  4. People v. HarvinCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1984
  5. People v. PippinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. MizellNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
  2. People v. GoreCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1989
  3. People v. McCabeCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1993
  4. People v. SwampNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
  5. People v. SwampNew York Court of Appeals · 1995

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API