Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ann Mayo, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1975-06-19
Citations: 36 N.Y.2d 1002
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ann Mayo, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 36
Pages: 1002–1006

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ann Mayo, Appellant.
Submitted May 9, 1975;
decided June 19, 1975
Bernard R. Bacharach for appellant.
Carl A. Vergari, District Attorney (James M. Rose and John R. Lacava of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The evidence presented to the Grand Jury, particularly as to the gross discrepancy in the number of toll tickets and the defendant's behavior when confronted by the police, was legally sufficient to support the indictment. (CPL 210.20; People v Dunleavy, 41 AD2d 717, affd 33 NY2d 573; People v Ward, 37 AD2d 174.) Nor is there any merit to the contention that the mere shortage of tickets does not support an inference that the defendant stole funds equal to the dollar value of the tickets (Penal Law, § 155.20, subd 2, par [b]). In the context of the Grand Jury procedure, legally sufficient means prima facie, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt (cf. People v Fellman, 35 NY2d 158).