People v. Cross
| Decision Date | 29 June 2000 |
| Citation | 273 A.D.2d 702,711 N.Y.S.2d 533 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>TRACY C. CROSS, Appellant. |
Crew III, J. P.
On September 28, 1997, Derrik Stanley stopped at defendant's home in the Town of Lewis, Essex County, to visit his high school friend, Lance Cross. Defendant, Cross' father, advised Stanley that his son was not at home and asked Stanley if he would drive him to the Village of Keeseville, Essex County, to pick up his son. Stanley agreed and the two drove off in defendant's car. At some point defendant became annoyed because Stanley was not driving fast enough and began driving the vehicle himself. Thereafter, at a speed estimated by Stanley to be in excess of 85 miles per hour, defendant lost control of the vehicle and crashed. Defendant, whose driver's license was suspended, apparently asked Stanley to say that he was the driver of the vehicle.
Defendant subsequently was indicted and charged with insurance fraud in the second degree, driving while intoxicated (two counts), aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree, reckless endangerment in the second degree, speed not reasonable in the circumstances and operating a vehicle without a safety belt. Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of the lesser included offense of insurance fraud in the third degree and of all other counts of the indictment as charged. County Court sentenced defendant to determinate terms of one year in jail on the insurance fraud, driving while intoxicated and aggravated unlicensed operation convictions, and six months in jail on the reckless endangerment conviction, said sentences to be served concurrently. Defendant now appeals.
Defendant initially contends that County Court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds, claiming that the People's statement of readiness was illusory inasmuch as the People had not retained an expert on retrograde extrapolation at the time such statement was made. We disagree. While it is true that where the People communicate their state of readiness on the record they must, in fact, be ready to proceed at such time (see, People v Wilson, 86 NY2d 753, 754), the fact that they obtained an expert for trial after their communication of readiness can in no way serve to vitiate such communication where, as here, they were ready at the time of such statement. The record reflects that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Sharpe
...Dombrowski–Bove, 300 A.D.2d 1122, 1123, 753 N.Y.S.2d 259 ; People v. O'Connor, 290 A.D.2d 519, 520, 738 N.Y.S.2d 55 ; People v. Cross, 273 A.D.2d 702, 703, 711 N.Y.S.2d 533 ; People v. Hagin, 238 A.D.2d 714, 716, 657 N.Y.S.2d 105 ; People v. Stiffler, 237 A.D.2d 753, 754, 655 N.Y.S.2d 139 ;......
-
People v. Menegan
...290 A.D.2d 519, 520, 738 N.Y.S.2d 55 [2002],lv. denied97 N.Y.2d 758, 742 N.Y.S.2d 619, 769 N.E.2d 365 [2002];People v. Cross, 273 A.D.2d 702, 703, 711 N.Y.S.2d 533 [2000];People v. MacDonald, 227 A.D.2d 672, 674–675, 641 N.Y.S.2d 749 [1996],affd.89 N.Y.2d 908, 653 N.Y.S.2d 267, 675 N.E.2d 1......
-
People v. Forney, 109876
...deemed admissible by the courts (see e.g. People v. Menegan, 107 A.D.3d 1166, 1168–1169, 967 N.Y.S.2d 461 [2013] ; People v. Cross, 273 A.D.2d 702, 703, 711 N.Y.S.2d 533 [2000] ; People v. MacDonald, 227 A.D.2d 672, 674–675, 641 N.Y.S.2d 749 [1996], affd 89 N.Y.2d 908, 653 N.Y.S.2d 267, 675......
-
People v. O'connor
...in ascertaining a person's blood alcohol level was qualified and that a proper foundation was laid for his testimony (see, People v. Cross, 273 A.D.2d 702; People v MacDonald, 227 A.D.2d 672, affd 89 N.Y.2d 908), and properly refused to admit photographs of crash tests since they were not p......