People v. Rivers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rivers

228 A.D.2d 291, 644 N.Y.2d 208, 644 N.Y.S.2d 208, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7136

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

DecidedJune 18, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 228 A.D.2d 291 (People v. Rivers) 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. Rivers, 228 A.D.2d 291, 644 N.Y.2d 208, 644 N.Y.S.2d 208, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7136 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

[292]*292While the court incorrectly stated that a statutory speedy trial issue (CPL 30.30) may be raised on appeal despite a guilty plea, this gratuitous misstatement was made after the plea was entered and there is no basis in the record for concluding that the misstatement had any effect on defendant’s decision to plead guilty. In any event, upon review of the record, we find no CPL 30.30 violation because, after filing the felony complaint on February 7, 1992, the People were required to be ready for trial within 182 days (see, People v Lomax, 50 NY2d 351), and we find no error in the motion court’s order finding only 172 days of delay chargeable to the People and therefore denying defendant’s motion. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.

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

[292]*292While the court incorrectly stated that a statutory speedy trial issue (CPL 30.30) may be raised on appeal despite a guilty plea, this gratuitous misstatement was made after the plea was entered and there is no basis in the record for concluding that the misstatement had any effect on defendant’s decision to plead guilty. In any event, upon review of the record, we find no CPL 30.30 violation because, after filing the felony complaint on February 7, 1992, the People were required to be ready for trial within 182 days (see, People v Lomax, 50 NY2d 351), and we find no error in the motion court’s order finding only 172 days of delay chargeable to the People and therefore denying defendant’s motion. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

228 A.D.2d 291, 644 N.Y.2d 208, 644 N.Y.S.2d 208, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rivers-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack