People v. Johnson

65 N.E.3d 1281, 28 N.Y.3d 1048
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 17, 2016·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. There is record support for the conclusion that the nearly 4V2 year delay between the crime and the indictment “did not deprive defendant of his due process right to prompt prosecution” (People v Velez, 22 NY3d 970, 972 [2013]). This is not a circumstance where “a lengthy and unjustifiable delay in commencing the prosecution . . . require [s] dismissal even though no actual prejudice to the defendant is shown” (People v Singer, 44 NY2d 241, 253-254 [1978]).

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia concur.

[1049] On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, in a memorandum.

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

People v. Johnson, 65 N.E.3d 1281, 28 N.Y.3d 1048 (N.Y. 2016).

65 N.E.3d 1281 (People v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Stefanovich
207 A.D.3d 1047 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Wagoner
2021 NY Slip Op 03981 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Ketchmore
2020 NY Slip Op 2826 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Innab
2020 NY Slip Op 1363 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Gang
145 A.D.3d 1566 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)