People v. Watson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Watson

93 A.D.2d 742, 461 N.Y.S.2d 290, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17577

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

DecidedApril 14, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 93 A.D.2d 742 (People v. Watson) 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. Watson, 93 A.D.2d 742, 461 N.Y.S.2d 290, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17577 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Koenig, J.), dated August 26,1981, granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment for failure of the People to prosecute, reversed, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and the indictment reinstated. The defendant was charged with one count of burglary in the third degree and one count of grand larceny in the third degree while acting in concert with another who has absconded and was not arraigned on the indictment. The matter came on for a suppression hearing. The court was informed that the Assistant District Attorney assigned to try the case was nearing the conclusion of another trial and an adjournment was requested to the beginning of the next week, but the case was sent out for the hearing, whereupon defense counsel moved orally for dismissal of the indictment. While the six-month rule is not applicable and the court is entitled to control its calendar, under the circumstances in view of the fact that the trial assistant would have been available at the beginning of the next week and was actually on trial, it was an abuse of discretion not to grant the adjournment. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Silverman, Bloom and Milonas, JJ.

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

—Order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Koenig, J.), dated August 26,1981, granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment for failure of the People to prosecute, reversed, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and the indictment reinstated. The defendant was charged with one count of burglary in the third degree and one count of grand larceny in the third degree while acting in concert with another who has absconded and was not arraigned on the indictment. The matter came on for a suppression hearing. The court was informed that the Assistant District Attorney assigned to try the case was nearing the conclusion of another trial and an adjournment was requested to the beginning of the next week, but the case was sent out for the hearing, whereupon defense counsel moved orally for dismissal of the indictment. While the six-month rule is not applicable and the court is entitled to control its calendar, under the circumstances in view of the fact that the trial assistant would have been available at the beginning of the next week and was actually on trial, it was an abuse of discretion not to grant the adjournment. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Silverman, Bloom and Milonas, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 A.D.2d 742, 461 N.Y.S.2d 290, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17577, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-watson-nyappdiv-1983.