People v. Colon
| Decision Date | 15 March 1982 |
| Citation | 450 N.Y.S.2d 136,112 Misc.2d 790 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Miguel Angel COLON, a/k/a Rafael Cordero, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term |
Robert M. Morgenthau, Dist. Atty. (Vivian Berger and Susan Corkery, New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
William E. Hellerstein and Marilyn A. Kneeland, New York City, for respondent.
Before TIERNEY, J. P., and RICCOBONO and SULLIVAN, JJ.
Order rendered September 21, 1981 (Atlas, J.) reversed on the law, motion denied, and complaints reinstated.
In the misdemeanor case now before us, defendant failed to appear on the return dates of the desk appearance tickets and bench warrants were issued. Misdemeanor complaints were filed on the appearance dates, commencing criminal actions. Defendant was ultimately apprehended and arraigned on the complaints, over sixty days and/or over ninety days after the respective class B and class A misdemeanor actions had been commenced. Defendant's position, sustained below, is that the failure of the People to convert the complaints to misdemeanor informations within the prescribed periods in which the People are required to be ready for trial mandated dismissal under CPL 30.30 (subd. 1), notwithstanding his absence during the interval between the commencement of the actions and his return to court on the warrants.
In the context of misdemeanor prosecutions in the Criminal Court, "... the failure of the People to convert from a complaint to an information at the inception of the proceeding will not generally contribute to delay or impede the People's ability to answer ready for trial" . Bearing in mind the distinction in procedure between misdemeanor and felony cases, principally the fact that an action may be commenced and can proceed in the Criminal Court on a complaint (compare CPL 100.05 and 100.10, subd. 4 with CPL 210.05), subject always to the defendant's waivable right to insist that he be prosecuted upon an information (CPL 170.65 subd. 3), we are not persuaded that People v. Sturgis, 38 N.Y.2d 625, 381 N.Y.S.2d 860, 345 N.E.2d 331 should be expansively read to apply to those situations where, as here, valid accusatory instruments were filed in a local criminal court against a defendant who avoided prosecution...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Harvin
...opportunity to examine the effects of the holding in People v. Colon, 59 N.Y.2d 921, 466 N.Y.S.2d 319, 453 N.E.2d 548, rev'g 112 Misc.2d 790, 450 N.Y.S.2d 136, on reasoning at 110 Misc.2d 917, 443 N.Y.S.2d 305, on marijuana and firearms cases, the defendants have moved to dismiss the misdem......
-
People v. Gelfand
...accusatory instrument on which to proceed. See People v. Colon, 59 N.Y.2d 921, 466 N.Y.S.2d 319, 453 N.E.2d 548 (1983), rev'g 112 Misc.2d 790, 450 N.Y.S.2d 136 (App.T.First Dept.1982), rev'g 110 Misc.2d 917, 443 N.Y.S.2d 305 (Crim.Ct.N.Y.Co.1981, Atlas, J.). Not having filed an accusatory i......
-
People v. Connor
...and who has not waived the filing of a sufficient information" (People v. Colon, 110 Misc.2d 917, 920, 443 N.Y.S.2d 305, revd. 112 Misc.2d 790, 450 N.Y.S.2d 136, revd. on opn. at Criminal Ct. 59 N.Y.2d 921, 466 N.Y.S.2d 319, 453 N.E.2d 548). Moreover, it is well settled that a waiver of the......
-
People v. Quiles
...to confer trial jurisdiction. People v. Colon, 110 Misc.2d 917, 920, 443 N.Y.S.2d 305 (Crim.Ct.N.Y.Co.1981), rev'd, 112 Misc.2d 790, 450 N.Y.S.2d 136 (1982), rev'd on Crim.Ct. op., 59 N.Y.2d 921, 466 N.Y.S.2d 319, 453 N.E.2d 548 (1983). Thus the charges against defendant based upon his cond......