The Trial Court Had No Jurisdiction Over the Defendant's Misdemeanor Charge as He Had Already Been Indicted Before Pleading Guilty Therefore Double Jeopardy Had Not Attached: In People v. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d 878, 513 N.Y.S.2d 331 (1987), the defendant pled guilty to a misdemeanor count of possessing a controlled substance, and he was sentenced. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d at , 513 N.Y.S.2d at 333. However, four days before the defendant pled guilty to the misdemeanor charge, the defendant was indicted for 14 counts of various narcotics offenses. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d at , 513 N.Y.S.2d at 333. At the time the defendant pled guilty to the misdemeanor charge, the prosecutor did not know that the defendant had been indicted. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d at , 513 N.Y.S.2d at 332. The trial court vacated the misdemeanor plea and sentence, and defendant argued that he could not be prosecuted on the 14-count indictment because double jeopardy had attached when he pled guilty to the misdemeanor charge. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d at , 513 N.Y.S.2d at 333. The reviewing court concluded that the State was not precluded from prosecuting the defendant on the felony indictment. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d at , 513 N.Y.S.2d at 335. The reviewing court reasoned that double jeopardy had not attached because the trial court had no jurisdiction over the misdemeanor charge once the defendant was indicted. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d at, 513 N.Y.S.2d at 334. This conclusion was based on a state statute that provided that the criminal courts were to be divested of jurisdiction once an indictment was filed. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d at 513 N.Y.S.2d at 334. The reviewing court also noted that double jeopardy had not attached because the state statute on double jeopardy provides that double jeopardy cannot attach when a defendant is prosecuted in a court that lacks jurisdiction over the defendant or the offense. Carter, 134 Misc. 2d at , 513 N.Y.S.2d at 335.