People c. Cascio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People c. Cascio

80 A.D.2d 922, 441 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10813

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 30, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 80 A.D.2d 922 (People c. Cascio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People c. Cascio, 80 A.D.2d 922, 441 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10813 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered May 27, 1980, convicting him of bribery in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial of defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment. Judgment reversed, on the law, motion to dismiss granted and matter remitted to Criminal Term for the entry of an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50. While periods of time attributable to appeals are excluded from the time chargeable to the People for purposes of determining whether a defendant’s rights have been violated, CPL 30.30 (subd 4, par [a]) specifically provides that such periods be “reasonable”. Under the facts of this case, the delay occasioned by the People’s failure to perfect their appeal to the Court of Appeals was not reasonable and mandates a granting of the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment. (See, e.g., People v Fromen, 308 NY 324.) Damiani, J. P., Titone, Mangano and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered May 27, 1980, convicting him of bribery in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial of defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment. Judgment reversed, on the law, motion to dismiss granted and matter remitted to Criminal Term for the entry of an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50. While periods of time attributable to appeals are excluded from the time chargeable to the People for purposes of determining whether a defendant’s rights have been violated, CPL 30.30 (subd 4, par [a]) specifically provides that such periods be “reasonable”. Under the facts of this case, the delay occasioned by the People’s failure to perfect their appeal to the Court of Appeals was not reasonable and mandates a granting of the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment. (See, e.g., People v Fromen, 308 NY 324.) Damiani, J. P., Titone, Mangano and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.2d 922, 441 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-c-cascio-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack