People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jones

235 A.D.2d 297, 653 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 447

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

DecidedJanuary 21, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 235 A.D.2d 297 (People v. Jones) 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. Jones, 235 A.D.2d 297, 653 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 447 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Herbert Altman, J., on speedy trial motion; Dorothy Cropper, J., at nonjury trial), rendered February 17, 1994, convicting defendant of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s speedy trial motion was properly denied. There is no merit to defendant’s argument that the People’s failure to explain the delay in production of Grand Jury minutes for inspection renders the entire period of non-production chargeable to the People. On the contrary, a reasonable period is excludable (People v Harris, 82 NY2d 409; People v Lawrence, 222 AD2d 279). Moreover, adjournments which are otherwise excludable pursuant to CPL 30.30 (4) are excludable from the period of non-production (People v Taylor, 217 AD2d 404).

We have considered defendant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Wallach, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Herbert Altman, J., on speedy trial motion; Dorothy Cropper, J., at nonjury trial), rendered February 17, 1994, convicting defendant of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s speedy trial motion was properly denied. There is no merit to defendant’s argument that the People’s failure to explain the delay in production of Grand Jury minutes for inspection renders the entire period of non-production chargeable to the People. On the contrary, a reasonable period is excludable (People v Harris, 82 NY2d 409; People v Lawrence, 222 AD2d 279). Moreover, adjournments which are otherwise excludable pursuant to CPL 30.30 (4) are excludable from the period of non-production (People v Taylor, 217 AD2d 404).

We have considered defendant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Wallach, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D.2d 297, 653 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jones-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack