People v. Gindi

• Decision Date: 26 June 1995
• Docket Number: AP-9
• Citation: 630 N.Y.S.2d 863,166 Misc.2d 672
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. David GINDI, Defendant
• Court: New York City Court

Page 863

630 N.Y.S.2d 863

166 Misc.2d 672

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. David GINDI, Defendant.

Criminal Court of the City of New York New York County, AP-9.

June 26, 1995.

Legal Aid Society (Robert M. Baum and Anita Bowen, of counsel), New York City, for defendant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York County (Alica Tam, of counsel), New York City, for People.

JOHN CATALDO, Judge.

The defendant is charged by simplified traffic information with Aggravated Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 511[1][a]. He moves for dismissal of the accusatory instrument for facial insufficiency, pursuant to CPL 170.30(1)(a), 170.35(1)(a), and 100.40.

The defendant contends that no statutory authority exists for the use of a simplified traffic information as a pleading in the criminal courts of the City of New York. It is the defendant's position that while the CPL specifically authorizes the use of simplified informations for traffic infractions and misdemeanors relating to traffic, it must be "in a brief or simplified form prescribed by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles" (CPL 100.10[2][a], and is facially sufficient only if it is in substantially the form prescribed by the commissioner of motor vehicles (CPL 100.25[1], 100.40[2]. ¹ According to the defendant, the only form prescribed by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles for simplified traffic informations is that set forth in the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York at 15 NYCRR part 91, pursuant to authority granted by Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207. Defendant argues that Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207 and the rules promulgated thereunder are inapplicable to New York City in that Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207(4) specifically exempts cities having a population of one million or over from its coverage. The defendant concludes from the Section 207(4) exclusion that the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles has not prescribed a simplified traffic information form for use in the City of New York, precluding its use in our criminal courts. Furthermore, the defendant contends that recent cases finding the complaint set forth at 15 NYCRR part 122 to be the form authorized by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles for simplified traffic informations within the City of New York are erroneous in their interpretation of the applicable statutes and rules. (See, Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 225, 226; People v. Vierno, 159 Misc.2d 770, 606 N.Y.S.2d 557 [Crim Ct, Richmond Co 1993]; People v. Alicea, NYLJ, May 17, 1994, at 23, col. 1 [Crim Ct, NY Co]; People v. Smith, NYLJ, August 16, 1994, at 25, col. 6 [Crim Ct, NY Co].

Defendant presents the novel argument that the complaint depicted at 15 NYCRR 122.2 applies only to administrative adjudications of traffic infractions before the Traffic Violations Bureau. It is his position that the Part 122 complaint does not constitute a simplified traffic information for criminal prosecutions in the Criminal Court of the City of New York.

In order to resolve the issues raised by defendant's motion, it is first necessary to understand the history underlying the creation by the New York State Legislature of the uniform traffic ticket provisions of the Vehicle and Traffic Law and the exclusion of the City of New York from its coverage, the introduction and use of simplified traffic informations in criminal courts throughout the State and within the City of New York, and the establishment of the Traffic Violations Bureau, as well as the intended interplay between these laws.

The Uniform Traffic Ticket and the Simplified Traffic Information

The uniform traffic summons and complaint, commonly known as the "uniform traffic ticket", was created by the State Legislature in 1953, thereby establishing the use of one universal ticket form for traffic offenses committed across the State. (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 74, L 1953, ch 834; recodified, effective October 1, 1960, as Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207, L 1959, ch. 775.) However, when prosecutors sought to use the uniform traffic complaint as an accusatory instrument, the Court of Appeals held that they could not do so as the uniform traffic ticket failed to satisfy the requirements of an accusatory instrument as then required. It was held to be a mere appearance ticket that could not serve as a pleading. People v. Scott, 3 N.Y.2d 148, 164 N.Y.S.2d 707, 143 N.E.2d 901 (1957). In 1962 the Legislature, in response to this deficiency, created Code of Criminal Procedure § 147 (predecessor of the Criminal Procedure Law) entitled "Simplified Traffic Informations". The goal of Section 147 was to allow the use of the uniform ticket packet, which was easy for police officers to carry and fill out, as both the appearance ticket and the accusatory instrument for traffic offenses, without having to meet the statutory requirements set forth for other criminal court accusatory instruments. Following the creation of Section 147, either the uniform traffic ticket promulgated pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207 or the form contained in the statute itself at Section 147-e could serve as the simplified traffic information.

This newly created simplified traffic information was subsequently upheld against constitutional challenge, and found to be a sufficient pleading. People v. Boback, 23 N.Y.2d 189, 295 N.Y.S.2d 912, 243 N.E.2d 135 (1968). Pursuant to the authority of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207, the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles set forth the form of the uniform traffic ticket to be used both as the appearance ticket and as a simplified traffic information at 15 NYCRR part 91. The form at Part 91 was recognized as the appropriate simplified traffic information form for use in the State (People v. Nuccio, 78 N.Y.2d 102, 571 N.Y.S.2d 693, 575 N.E.2d 111 [1991] outside of the City of New York. However, by the provisions of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207(4) and 15 NYCRR 91.4, the form set forth at Part 91 is not the form to be used within the City of New York. People v. Vierno, supra; People v. Alicea, supra.

The Exclusion for the City of New York

The City of New York, from the inception of the uniform traffic ticket provisions in the Vehicle and Traffic Law in 1953, sought exclusion from its coverage. ² The City's aim was to use its own ticket form to serve the purposes of the Vehicle and Traffic Law's uniform traffic ticket, while additionally functioning as an appearance ticket for Administrative Code, Penal Law and other offenses. In 1955 the Legislature passed an amendment, codified at Vehicle and Traffic Law § 74(4), for the specific purpose of allowing New York City to continue to use and/or adopt its own ticket form. ³

Subsequent to the 1962 creation of the simplified traffic information, further amendments were made to the Vehicle and Traffic Law effecting New York City's exclusion. In 1966, New York City's exclusion was scheduled to be repealed as part of Governor Rockefeller's 1966 highway safety plan. However, in 1967, a superseding amendment to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207 retained the subdivision (4) exclusion, but raised its population threshold from cities of 175,000 or more to cities of one million or more. The purpose of the increased population threshold was to limit the exclusion solely to the City of New York. The rationale underlying the 1967 amendment, as stated in the Governor's Memorandum to the legislation, was to allow the City of New York to employ its own "universal" summons and complaint form to be used in all its traffic cases as well as for other violations, in recognition of the unique needs of law enforcement in such a large and complex city as the City of New York. (McKinney's Session Laws of New York, 1967, Governor's Memoranda, p. 1548). ⁴

Creation of the New York City Traffic Violations Bureau

In 1969 the New York State Legislature passed Article 2-A of Vehicle and Traffic Law, §§ 225 to 228: Adjudication of Traffic Infractions (effective July 1, 1970), specifically designed to reform the traffic court system for New York City. The goal was to eliminate minor traffic infractions from New York City's criminal courts, thereby relieving them of the large volume of traffic cases then burdening the system. The legislative history reveals that the legislation was expressly prompted by this overcrowding in the New York City criminal courts. (McKinney's Session Laws of New York, 1969, Governor's Memoranda, p. 2578).

Article 2-A created the Traffic Violations Bureau (TVB) where traffic infractions could be disposed of in administrative proceedings. Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 155 and 225 provide that the criminal courts retain concurrent jurisdiction over traffic infractions with the administrative tribunal. Where a crime is charged along with a traffic infraction, the proper jurisdiction is in the criminal courts. If a crime relating to traffic is improperly made returnable before the administrative tribunal, the TVB is to transfer the complaint to the appropriate criminal court. "Thereafter, such case shall be treated in the same manner as if the complaint had initially been filed with such court". Vehicle and Traffic Law § 225(2).

Vehicle and Traffic Law § 226(1) authorizes the Commissioner to prescribe by regulation the form for the summons and complaint. The form used may, but need not, be in the same form as the uniform summons of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 207. For the City of New York this would be its form used under its Section 207(4) exclusion, which may be changed by rule or regulation.

Pursuant to the authority set forth in Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 225 and 226, the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles set forth the form for the ticket to be used in New York City at 15 NYCRR part 122 (effective July 1, 1970). Part 122 created a single summons and complaint form to be used not only in cases returnable before the department (TVB), but also as the accusatory instrument in the...