Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates
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
Advocates
Judges

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff, v. PETER RIMKUS, Defendant.

WALSH, J.

Motion to dismiss denied. Upon an arraignment in City Court upon a felony information, the sole duty of the magistrate is to determine whether or not a crime has been committed and that there is sufficient cause to believe the defendant guilty thereof (Code Crim. Pro., § 208). The sole basis of the motion is that defendant is charged with a felony (Penal Law, § 483-a) in the information by carnally abusing a child of the age of ten years or under whereas the facts alleged in the information show the victim was an infant of the age of ten years and two months at the time of the alleged crime making the crime that of the grade of a misdemeanor (Penal Law, § 483-b).

It is immaterial whether the crime charged be a felony or a misdemeanor since both the Grand Jury and the Utica City Court have concurrent jurisdiction of indictable misdemeanors committed within the city of Utica. (Utica City Court Code, § 4; L. 1882, ch. 103, as amd. by L. 1926, ch. 588, § 1.) In addition, the Utica City Court has "power in its discretion to admit any defendant charged with a misdemeanor to bail to await the action of any grand jury" (Utica City Court Code, § 4).

The case of People v. O'Neill ( 53 N.Y.S.2d 945) while sound law on a motion to dismiss an indictment which on its face is invalid is not controlling authority on a motion to dismiss a felony information.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. RIMKUS
(Oct 4, 1948)