People v. Collins
| Citation | 735 N.Y.S.2d 912,190 Misc.2d 72 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>FRED COLLINS, Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 25 October 2001 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (New York) |
William L. Murphy, District Attorney of Richmond County, Staten Island (Jonathan J. Silbermann and Keri Anne Caden of counsel), for appellant.
Malvina Nathanson, New York City, for respondent.
ARONIN, J. P., PATTERSON and GOLIA, JJ., concur.
Order unanimously affirmed.
A misdemeanor complaint was filed on June 21, 1999. Thereafter, on July 25, 1999, the misdemeanor complaint was converted to an information. On June 23, 2000, the defendant moved to dismiss the information on the ground that he was denied a speedy trial in violation of CPL 30.30 (1) (b). The court granted the motion, finding a total of 91 days chargeable to the prosecution. We agree.
The People must declare their readiness to proceed to trial within 90 days of filing an accusatory instrument when a defendant is charged with a class A misdemeanor (CPL 30.30 [1] [b]). Thus, this 90-day period started to run on June 21, 1999 upon the filing of the misdemeanor complaint. Several adjournments were thereafter requested by both parties. On appeal, the People concede that they were not in fact ready for trial for 63 days and only take issue with the adjournment from March 8, 2000 through April 5, 2000 being charged to them. As to said issue, after the pretrial hearings concluded on February 10, 2000, the court stated that it was reserving its decision and, because the case was "fairly old," it was adjourning this case until March 8, 2000 for both its decision on defendant's motions and for trial. On March 8th, the court denied the defendant's motions and asked the People if they were ready to proceed to trial. The People indicated that they were not ready to proceed to trial since they were unaware that the case was put on for trial that day. Inasmuch as the court specifically indicated on February 10, 2000 that the case would move forward for trial on March 8, 2000, it cannot be argued that the adjournment from March 8, 2000 through April 5, 2000 was excludable for CPL 30.30 purposes (see, People v Green, 90 AD2d 705).
Therefore, there are a total of 91 days chargeable to the People since the commencement of the action on June 21, 1999. Accordingly, defendant's motion to dismiss was properly granted.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Adrovic
...312, 798 N.Y.S.2d 47 (1st Dept. 2005) ; People v. Greene , 223 A.D.2d 474, 637 N.Y.S.2d 79 (1st Dept. 1996). But see People v. Collins , 190 Misc. 2d 72, 735 N.Y.S.2d 912 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2001).0 chargeable days.March 11, 2019 — April 9, 2019 On March 11, 2019, the People were not ready ......
-
People v. Avila
...be filed with the court but must also be served promptly upon the defense (People v. Kendzia, 64 N.Y.2d 331 [1985];People v. Collins, 190 Misc.2d 72 [App Term, 2d Dept 2001] ). In the pre-readiness phase, unless there is an excludable basis for the adjournment, the People are responsible fo......
-
People v. McClure
... ... (see People v Telemaque, 36 Misc.3d 1239 [A] [Crim ... Ct, Kings County 2012] [23 day delay from when the People ... served prior counsel and the next court appearance]; ... People v Corley, 30 Misc.3d 1232 [A] [Crim Ct, NY ... County 2011] [48 day delay]; People v Collins, 186 ... Misc.2d 818 [Crim Ct, Richmond County 2000] [5 day delay], ... affd on other grounds 190 Misc.2d 72 [App Term, 2d ... Dept 2001]; People v Chittumuri, 189 Misc.2d 743 ... [Crim Ct, Queens County 2001] [28 day delay]; Zhu, ... supra [15 day delay]). Cases that did not cite ... Zhu but ... ...
-
People v. Strafer, 2006 NY Slip Op 50046(U) (NY 1/12/2006)
...case law." See, also, People v. Collins, 186 Misc 2d 818, 821, 720 NYS2d 885 (Crim. Ct., Richmond Cty, 2000), aff., 190 Misc 2d 72, 735 NYS2d 912 (App. Term, 2d Dept., 2001) ("notification must be made as soon as possible to satisfy the promptness requirement."); People v. Chittumuri, 189 M......