People v. Rodriguez

134 Misc. 2d 587, 511 N.Y.S.2d 991, 1987 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2069
CourtCriminal Court of the City of New York
DecidedJanuary 13, 1987
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 134 Misc. 2d 587 (People v. Rodriguez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Criminal Court of the City 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. Rodriguez, 134 Misc. 2d 587, 511 N.Y.S.2d 991, 1987 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2069 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1987).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Jo Ann Ferdinand, J.

Defendant Charlie Rodriguez is charged with reckless endangerment in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.20); leaving the scene of an incident (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 600); driving while intoxicated (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [3]) [588]*588and reckless driving (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1190) — all class A misdemeanors. Defendant has moved pursuant to CPL 170.30 (1) (e) and 30.30 to dismiss the information on the ground that his statutory right to a speedy trial has been violated.

The People are required to answer ready for trial within 90 days of the commencement of a criminal action in which the highest charge is an A misdemeanor. (CPL 30.30 [1] [b].) This action commenced on July 3, 1986, the day the accusatory instrument was filed and defendant was arraigned. (CPL 100.05.) Defendant has alleged that more than 90 days of undue delay elapsed. Thus, the People must demonstrate sufficient excludable time. (People v Berkowitz, 50 NY2d 333 [1980].)

The misdemeanor complaint filed at the arraignment required a corroborating affidavit to be converted to an information.

On October 2, the 91st day after the action commenced, the People answered ready for trial and announced that they had filed the corroborating affidavit with the court clerk on September 22 — the 81st day.

It is uncontroverted that all the time which elapsed before the corroborating affidavit was filed is charged to the People inasmuch as they are required to secure a jurisdictionally valid information. (People v Colon, 59 NY2d 921 [1983].)

The sole issue to be resolved is whether the time from the date the People filed the corroborating affidavit to the date they announced their readiness for trial should be charged to the People for speedy trial purposes.

Defendant contends that the People did not answer ready for trial within 90 days of the commencement of the action and, accordingly, the information must be dismissed pursuant to CPL 30.30 (1) (b). However, the People argue since they filed the corroborating affidavit with the court clerk on the 81st day they are to be charged only until filing.

In August and September of 1986, over 2,000 cases were pending in Part AP-1 of the New York County Criminal Court and in excess of 150 cases were heard each day.

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

Related

People v. Sanchez
147 Misc. 2d 457 (Criminal Court of the City of New York, 1990)
People v. Hayes
141 Misc. 2d 505 (Criminal Court of the City of New York, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
134 Misc. 2d 587, 511 N.Y.S.2d 991, 1987 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2069, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rodriguez-nycrimct-1987.