People v Stencel

Holding The court held that the introduction of evidence to a grand jury that is later found to be irrelevant at trial does not automatically render the grand jury proceedings defective or the indictment unsupported by legally sufficient evidence. Dismissal of an indictment for defective grand jury proceedings is an exceptional remedy reserved for rare cases of pervasive and willful prosecutorial misconduct, which was not present here.

The court’s words

isolated instances of misconduct, including the erroneous handling of evidentiary matters, do not merit [dismissal] of the indictment

2026 NY Slip Op 04574, at the official text

evidence later deemed inadmissible may still support an indictment provided that it was not inherently incompetent or barred by a per se exclusionary rule

2026 NY Slip Op 04574, at the official text

the statutory test [for determining whether a grand jury proceeding was rendered defective due to prosecutorial misconduct], which does not turn on mere flaw, error or skewing . . . is very precise and very high

2026 NY Slip Op 04574, at the official text

the exceptional remedy of dismissal for defective grand jury proceedings is available in rare cases of prosecutorial misconduct upon a showing that, in the absence of the complained-of actions of the prosecutor, the grand jury might have decided not to indict defendant

2026 NY Slip Op 04574, at the official text