AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. JAMES JACKSON, appellant. (Ind. No. 11793/96)

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

"An indictment is multiplicitous when `two separate counts * * * charge the same crime' * * * Multiplicity does not exist, however, `if each count requires proof of an additional fact that the other does not'" ( People v. Demetsenare, 243 A.D.2d 777, 779-780, quoting People v. Kindlon, 217 A.D.2d 793, 794-795). Here, there is no multiplicity since the counts involved allege violations of different provisions of the Penal Law. Each count, therefore, requires proof of at least one fact that the others do not.

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

S. MILLER, J.P., O'BRIEN, FRIEDMANN, and FLORIO. JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. JACKSON
(Sep 27, 1999)