People v. Neiss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Neiss

81 A.D.2d 599, 437 N.Y.S.2d 460, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11080

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

DecidedApril 6, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 81 A.D.2d 599 (People v. Neiss) 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. Neiss, 81 A.D.2d 599, 437 N.Y.S.2d 460, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11080 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeals by defendants from two judgments (one as to each of them) of the Supreme Court, Kings County, both rendered January 10, 1978, convicting each of them of criminal solicitation (two counts) and giving an unlawful gratuity, upon their respective pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals bring up for review the denial of defendants’ motions to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds. Judgments affirmed. Defendants’ pleas of guilty resulted in a waiver of their statutory claim made under CPL 30.30 (see People v Friscia, 51 NY2d 845). As to the constitutional speedy trial claim, we hold that the lack of pretrial incarceration and the absence of demonstrable prejudice to the defendants’ case outweigh the delay of 22 months between the initial felony complaint and the guilty pleas, a major portion of which is attributable either to adjournments requested or consented to by the defense, or to plea negotiations (see, generally, People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442, 445; Barker v Wingo, 407 US 514; see, also, People v Friscia, supra). We have considered defendants’ claim of double jeopardy and find it to be without merit. Gulotta, J.P., Hargett, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeals by defendants from two judgments (one as to each of them) of the Supreme Court, Kings County, both rendered January 10, 1978, convicting each of them of criminal solicitation (two counts) and giving an unlawful gratuity, upon their respective pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals bring up for review the denial of defendants’ motions to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds. Judgments affirmed. Defendants’ pleas of guilty resulted in a waiver of their statutory claim made under CPL 30.30 (see People v Friscia, 51 NY2d 845). As to the constitutional speedy trial claim, we hold that the lack of pretrial incarceration and the absence of demonstrable prejudice to the defendants’ case outweigh the delay of 22 months between the initial felony complaint and the guilty pleas, a major portion of which is attributable either to adjournments requested or consented to by the defense, or to plea negotiations (see, generally, People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442, 445; Barker v Wingo, 407 US 514; see, also, People v Friscia, supra). We have considered defendants’ claim of double jeopardy and find it to be without merit. Gulotta, J.P., Hargett, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.2d 599, 437 N.Y.S.2d 460, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-neiss-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack