People v. Dobrzenski

• Decision Date: 30 July 2020
• Docket Number: CR-06113-19
• Citation: 69 Misc.3d 333,130 N.Y.S.3d 238
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Michael A. DOBRZENSKI, Defendant.
• Court: New York City Court

69 Misc.3d 333

130 N.Y.S.3d 238

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff,

v.Michael A. DOBRZENSKI, Defendant.

CR-06113-19

City Court, New York, Oneida County.

Decided on July 30, 2020

Scott D. McNamara, Oneida County District Attorney (Kimberly R. Sudakow, Esq. of counsel), for the People,

Anthony F. Brigano, Esq., of Utica, New York, Attorney for the Defendant

Christopher Giruzzi, J.

The defendant was charged with the following offenses on the date specified therein:

Docket No.:CR-06113-19.

On or about August 4, 2019 the defendant was charged with the following offenses:

1. Harassment in the 2nd Degree in violation of Penal Law § 240.26(1)

2. Criminal Mischief in violation of Penal Law § 145.00(1)

3. Criminal Obstruction of Breathing in violation of Penal Law § 121.11(A)

Docket No.:CR-06554-19

On or about August 15, 2019 the defendant was charged with the following offense:

1. Criminal Mischief in violation of Penal Law § 145.00 (1)

Docket No.:CR-09080-19

On or about December 1, 2019 the defendant was charged with the following offense:

1. Criminal Contempt 2nd in violation of Penal Law § 215.50(3)

On June 15, 2020 the defendant filed a "Notice of Motion" along with an attorney affirmation seeking the following relief:

1. Dismissal of the charges based upon the Defendant being denied the right to speedy trial pursuant to CPL 30.30(b) and CPL 170.30(1)(e) ;

2. Such other and further relief as the court may deem appropriate.

Arguments by the Parties

The defendant argues pursuant to CPL § 30.30 and § 170.30(1)(e) the People were not ready for trial on the underlying charges within the prescribed statutory time period and as such, all of the criminal offenses should be dismissed. Specifically, the defendant sets forth that prior to the enactment of CPL § 245.50[3] the People were required to communicate and declare their readiness for trial with such intent being made part of the court's record. The Court notes, the defendant does not dispute the People announced their readiness prior to January 1, 2020, as it pertains to the underlying charges, and such time frames are accounted for in the calculations set forth herein.

The defendant further asserts that upon enactment and implementation of CPL § 245.50[3] the People have an affirmative obligation to file a certificate of compliance and until such filing occurs the People shall be "charged time" for the purposes of speedy trial calculations.

Specifically, the defendant relies upon the following calculations in support of a speedy trial violation:

Docket: CR-06113-19 Summary:

Days Charged

31 Time period between filing of the accusatory instrument and arraignment (August 5, 2019 to September 6, 2019)

19 Time period between arraignment and adjourned date (September 6, 2019 to September 25, 2019)

6 Time period between appearance date and Notice of Trial Readiness filed (September 25, 2019 to October 1, 2019)

51 Time period between enactment of new statute CPL § 245.50[3] and appearance for Sandoval/Ventimiglia Hearing which was adjourned due to conflict declared by Public Defender's Office (January 1, 2020 through February 21, 2020)

82 Time period from last court appearance and when the Certificate of Compliance was filed by the People (February 21, 2020 through May 13, 2020)

Total: 189 Days Charged to the People

Docket: CR-06554-19 Summary:

Days Charged

21 Time period between filing of the accusatory instrument and date of arraignment (August 17, 2019 to September 6, 2019)

19 Time period between arraignment and adjourned date (September 6, 2019 to September 25, 2019)

6 Time period between appearance date and Notice of Trial Readiness filed (September 25, 2019 to October 1, 2019) 51 Time period between enactment of new statute CPL § 245.50[3] and appearance for Sandoval/Ventimiglia Hearing which was adjourned due to conflict declared by Public Defender's Office (January 1, 2020 through February 21, 2020)

82 Time period from last court appearance and when the Certificate of Compliance was filed by the People (February 21, 2020 through May 13, 2020)

Total charged to the People: 179 days

Docket: CR-09080-19 Summary:

Days Charged

14 Time period between filing of the accusatory instrument and date of arraignment at which time People announce readiness (December 5, 2019 to December 18, 2019)

51 Time period between enactment of new statute CPL § 245.50[3] and appearance for Sandoval/Ventimiglia Hearing which was adjourned due to conflict declared by Public Defender's Office (January 1, 2020 through February 21, 2020)

88 Time period from last court appearance and when Certificate of Compliance was filed by the People (February 21, 2020 through May 19, 2020)

Total Charged to the People: 153 days

On July 15, 2020, the People filed an affirmation opposing the relief being requested, arguing they have complied with all requirements pursuant to CPL § 240, prior to January 1, 2020, and fulfilled all discovery obligations subsequent to the enactment of § 245 of the Criminal Procedure Law. Specifically, the People cite to their readiness as having been announced on the record along with filings of "Notice of Readiness" and the defendant having acknowledged compliance with all discovery obligations as evidenced in the defendant's prior motion filed on March 16, 2020. The People further assert there are extensive periods of time since the commencement of the action which should not be charged to the People, including delays due to the assignment of new counsel, adjournment of trial dates and those as a result of limited court operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court notes, the specific exclusions as it relates to these arguments are not articulated in the responding papers submitted.

The People do, however, offer the following calculations for speedy trial purposes:

Docket: CR-06113-19 Summary:

Days Charged:

21 Time period from date of arraignment (September 6, 2019) through date when readiness was declared (September 27, 2019). Subsequent dates when readiness was declared - November 6, 2019, December 18, 2019, January 28, 2020, March 16, 2020, May 13, 2020.

Docket: CR-06554-19 Summary:

Days Charged:

21 Time period from date of arraignment (September 6, 2019) through date of readiness declared (September 27, 2019); Subsequent dates when readiness was declared - November 6, 2019, December 18, 2019, March 16, 2020, May 13, 2020.

Docket: CR-09080-19 Summary:

Days Charged:

14 Time period from date of arraignment (December 4, 2019) through date of readiness declared (December 18, 2019); Subsequent dates when readiness was declared - March 16, 2020, May 19, 2020.

Standard of Law and Findings by the Court

As it pertains to a speedy trial motion, the initial burden rests upon the defendant and is met "by alleging only that the prosecution failed to declare readiness within the statutorily prescribed time period" ( People v. Luperon , 85 N.Y.2d 71, 623 N.Y.S.2d 735, 647 N.E.2d 1243 [1995] ). The burden then shifts to the People to identify the exclusions, upon which the People rely, to the statutory time frame.( People v. Amrhein , 128 A.D.3d 1412, 7 N.Y.S.3d 806 [4th Dept. 2015] )

In addition, pursuant to CPL 30.30(1), the applicable speedy trial period is determined by the highest charge in the accusatory instrument and in the matters pending before the court a "Class A Misdemeanor" is the highest charge made part of each docket, thus, requiring the People to set forth their readiness within ninety days of commencement of the action. It is noted, although a criminal action commences with the filing of the accusatory instrument, counting for speedy trial purposes commences the following day. ( People v. Stiles , 70 N.Y.2d 765, 520 N.Y.S.2d 745, 514 N.E.2d 1368 [1987] ) Thus, the Court finds based upon the filing of the accusatory instruments on August 5, 2019, August 17, 2019 and December 5, 2019 the People had to announce ready for trial by November 3, 2019, November 15, 2019 and March 4, 2020 respectively, unless the People can show excludable time warranting otherwise. ( People v. Cortes , 80 N.Y.2d 201, 590 N.Y.S.2d 9, 604 N.E.2d 71 [1992] )

In light of the distinction which needs to be drawn between declarations of readiness announced prior to and subsequently to January 1, 2020, the Court must undertake an examination of the various time periods. Prior to January 1, 2020, in order for the People to announce their readiness for trial, they must have either communicated such readiness to defense counsel while before the court or in the alternative served a written notice on the defendant along with filing same with the court clerk. ( People v. Kendzia, 64 N.Y.2d 331, 486 N.Y.S.2d 888, 476 N.E.2d 287 [1985] )

As such, the Court will first determine the amount of days charged to the People, for purposes of speedy trial, from the commencement of the criminal proceedings through December 31, 2019. Unlike an appearance ticket, the time between the issuance of a summons by the Court, and the time the defendant is directed to appear for arraignment, in not excludable, contrary to the calculation submitted by the People. ( CPL § 30.30(5)(b) ; People v. Hauben, 12 Misc 3d 1172(A), 2006 WL 1724042 [Nassau Dist. Ct. 2006] ). As such, the time period for the each docket in the year 2019 is as follows: Docket:CR-06113-19, 56 days (August 6, 2019 through October 1, 2019 date when Notice of Readiness was filed); CR-06554-19 , 46 days (August 16, 2019 through October 1, 2019 date when Notice of Readiness was filed); CR-09080-19, 14 days (December 5, 2019 through December 18, 2019 date of announcement of readiness). While the People assert readiness was declared before the Court on September 26, 2020, as it relates to Dockets CR-06113-19 and CR-06554-19, such appearance did not occur and the matters were re-calendared to November 6, 2019. The parties agree to the number of days accrued in 2019 for docket CR-09080-19.

This Court must undertake further analysis for the period of time commencing January 1, 2020. As this Court has...