Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial granted.
The main prosecution witness in this case was Charles Miller, who allegedly purchased a quantity of marihuana from defendant. Miller was an accomplice, as a matter of law, since he "may reasonably be considered to have participated in * * * [a]n offense based upon the same or some of the same facts or conduct which constitute the offense charged" (CPL 60.22, subd 2, par [b]; see, also, People v Berger, ...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
