New York County Courts, 1962

People v. Guidarelli

People v. Guidarelli
New York County Courts · Decided December 6, 1962 · Wemple
37 Misc. 2d 398; 235 N.Y.S.2d 96; 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2160

Counsel

Charles J. Farone for Jerry A. Guidarelli, defendant. D. Vincent Cerrito, District Attorney (Howard Levine of counsel), for plaintiff.

People v. Guidarelli

Opinion of the Court

Archibald C. Wemple, J.

The defendant’s motion is based on the contention that the evidence heard before the Grand Jury pertaining to alleged crimes committed by the defendant Jerry A. Guidarelli was not sufficient or adequate to warrant the finding of the indictment herein. It is claimed that any evidence adduced before the Grand Jury was given by witnesses who were in reality co-conspirators. It is further contended that their testimony was uncorroborated and therefore insufficient. It is axiomatic that a Grand Jury must have before it legal evidence in order to find an indictment. It is presumed that an indictment was properly found and that it is grounded upon legal and sufficient evidence (People v. Walburn, 159 N. Y. S. 185,186).

The rule of law uniformly followed is that a conviction cannot be had on the testimony of an accomplice unless his testimony be corroborated by such other evidence as tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime. (Code Grim. Pro., § 399.) After reading a substantial part of the testimony given before the Grand Jury it is clear to this court that the evidence produced was legal and sufficient in depth to justify the finding of the indictments herein. Therefore, this motion to examine the minutes of the Grand Jury be and is hereby denied.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.