People v. Dedmon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dedmon

53 A.D.2d 646, 384 N.Y.S.2d 846, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13370

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

DecidedJune 14, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 53 A.D.2d 646 (People v. Dedmon) 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 v. Dedmon, 53 A.D.2d 646, 384 N.Y.S.2d 846, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13370 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 16, 1975, which granted defendant’s oral motion to dismiss the indictment for failure to accord the defendant a speedy trial. Order reversed, on the law, and motion denied, without prejudice to its renewal upon compliance with the provisions of CPL 210.45 (subd 1), and indictment reinstated. A motion to dismiss an indictment must be made in writing and upon reasonable notice to the People (CPL 210.45, subd 1; People v Trottie, 47 AD2d 751; People v Ryan, 42 AD2d 869). The granting of such motion, orally made, in the absence of a waiver of the statutory requirements by the prosecutor, constitutes reversible error (People v Trottie, supra; People v Ryan, supra; People v Cowan, 21 AD2d 687). Moreover, applying the standards set forth by the Court of Appeals in People v Taranovich (37 NY2d 442, 444—445), we are of the opinion that the record on appeal does not justify dismissal of the indictment. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Rabin, Shapiro and Titone, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 16, 1975, which granted defendant’s oral motion to dismiss the indictment for failure to accord the defendant a speedy trial. Order reversed, on the law, and motion denied, without prejudice to its renewal upon compliance with the provisions of CPL 210.45 (subd 1), and indictment reinstated. A motion to dismiss an indictment must be made in writing and upon reasonable notice to the People (CPL 210.45, subd 1; People v Trottie, 47 AD2d 751; People v Ryan, 42 AD2d 869). The granting of such motion, orally made, in the absence of a waiver of the statutory requirements by the prosecutor, constitutes reversible error (People v Trottie, supra; People v Ryan, supra; People v Cowan, 21 AD2d 687). Moreover, applying the standards set forth by the Court of Appeals in People v Taranovich (37 NY2d 442, 444—445), we are of the opinion that the record on appeal does not justify dismissal of the indictment. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Rabin, Shapiro and Titone, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 A.D.2d 646, 384 N.Y.S.2d 846, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13370, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dedmon-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack