Legal Opinion

People v. Pillich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided September 30, 1994No. Appeal No. 1PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention that the single count of the indictment charging defendant with grand larceny in the third degree is duplicitous (see, CPL 200.30 [1]; People v Davis, 72 NY2d 32, 38) because it charges him with both larceny by false pretenses (Penal Law § 155.05 [2] [a]) and larceny by false promise (Penal Law § 155.05 [2] [d]). The People .are not required to allege "the particular theory of larceny” in the indictment (Penal Law § 155.45 [1]; see, People v Farruggia, 41 AD2d 894), and Supreme Court, as trier of the facts, was entitled to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. BleakleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. People v. DavisNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. People v. BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
  5. People v. FarruggiaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. TigheAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  2. People v. EdmeadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
  3. People v. McNamaraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  4. People v. WatsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API