People v. Osgood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Osgood

80 A.D.2d 623, 436 N.Y.S.2d 65, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10317

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 80 A.D.2d 623 (People v. Osgood) 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. Osgood, 80 A.D.2d 623, 436 N.Y.S.2d 65, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10317 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered September 1, 1978, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment upon the ground that the People were not ready for trial within six months of the commencement of this action as required by CPL 30.30 (subd 1, par [a]). By order dated September 28, 1979 this court reversed the order, on the law, and denied the motion to dismiss the indictment (People v Osgood, 71 AD2d 1030). On December 22, 1980, the Court of Appeals reversed the order of this court and remitted the case to this court “for review of the facts, if any” (52 NY2d 37, 46). Order affirmed. The six-month period within which the People are required to be ready for trial under CPL 30.30 (subd 1, par [a]) is to be measured from the date of filing of the felony complaint, and not from the date of filing of the indictment, even when, as here, the complaint was dismissed (see People v Osgood, 52 NY2d 37, supra). Using that date as a point of reference, it is undisputed, on this record, that the People were chargeable for a time period in excess of six months and, accordingly, Criminal Term correctly dismissed the indictment. Mollen, P.J., Hopkins, Damiani 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 September 1, 1978, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment upon the ground that the People were not ready for trial within six months of the commencement of this action as required by CPL 30.30 (subd 1, par [a]). By order dated September 28, 1979 this court reversed the order, on the law, and denied the motion to dismiss the indictment (People v Osgood, 71 AD2d 1030). On December 22, 1980, the Court of Appeals reversed the order of this court and remitted the case to this court “for review of the facts, if any” (52 NY2d 37, 46). Order affirmed. The six-month period within which the People are required to be ready for trial under CPL 30.30 (subd 1, par [a]) is to be measured from the date of filing of the felony complaint, and not from the date of filing of the indictment, even when, as here, the complaint was dismissed (see People v Osgood, 52 NY2d 37, supra). Using that date as a point of reference, it is undisputed, on this record, that the People were chargeable for a time period in excess of six months and, accordingly, Criminal Term correctly dismissed the indictment. Mollen, P.J., Hopkins, Damiani and Titone, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.2d 623, 436 N.Y.S.2d 65, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-osgood-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack