Opinion
March 2, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, and the indictment is reinstated.
The Grand Jury testimony revealed that on July 20, 1985, sometime between 12:05 A.M. and 7:45 A.M., the door to the victim's home was kicked in or knocked down and, among other things, a television set and a VCR had been taken from the home. During this time, the defendant was seen parked in a car in front of the victim's home, and an individual carrying a television set and a VCR placed these items in the car, and the defendant and this individual drove away. The Grand Jury indicted the defendant for the crimes of burglary in the second degree, criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and petit larceny. Criminal Term dismissed the indictment on the ground that there was insufficient proof of the defendant's criminal intent to charge him as an accomplice to the crimes.
The proper purpose of an indictment is to bring a defendant to trial upon a prima facie case which, if unexplained, would warrant a conviction (see, People v. Lancaster, 69 N.Y.2d 20; People v. Brewster, 63 N.Y.2d 419; People v. Oakley, 28 N.Y.2d 309; People v. Fraser, 126 A.D.2d 740; CPL 70.10, 190.65 Crim. Proc.). In our view, the evidence produced was sufficient to sustain the indictment, and Criminal Term erred in dismissing it (see, People v Jackson, 44 N.Y.2d 935; People v. Williams, 106 A.D.2d 786). Mangano, J.P., Bracken, Brown and Spatt, JJ., concur.