People v. Ganett
Cases that cite this one
29 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Flores v. Keane (District Court, S.D. New York 2001)
- Noble v. State (Md. 1982)
- Tirado v. Senkowski (District Court, W.D. New York 2005)
- People v. Manuel (Frank) (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- People v. Iqbal (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
- People v. Martinez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- People v. Ponce (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
- People v. Cedeno (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
- People v. Roman (N.Y. 1996)
- People v. Sloan (N.Y. 1992)
- People v. Mitchell (N.Y. 1992)
- People v. Mulinar (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
- People v. Velasco (N.Y. 1991)
- People v. Steele (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- People v. Abushatara (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- People v. Whitmore (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- People v. Blake (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- People v. Lesiuk (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- People v. Dunlap (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- People v. Howard (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- People v. Lowery (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- People v. Powell (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- People v. Barbaran (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- People v. Clapper (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- People v. Hoff (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the indictment was a blank authorization permitting the police to arrest any person whom they might choose is wholly without merit. It is obvious that the Grand Jury intended to indict the specific person who sold heroin to Petronella on March 12, 1976, that person having been identified to the Grand Jury as “Sabu Ganett”. This was the only reasonable interpretation to be drawn from the Grand Jury testimony of Petronella.
In these circumstances it was error for the trial court to deny the motion of the People to amend the indictment to substitute the name of Sabu Gary, the true name of the defendant, for Sabu Ganett.
Order affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.