People v. Glaubman
| Court | New York Villiage Court |
| Citation | 327 N.Y.S.2d 186,68 Misc.2d 698 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Michael GLAUBMAN. |
| Decision Date | 09 December 1971 |
Page 186
v.
Michael GLAUBMAN.
Page 187
Morris H. Schneider, Garden City, for defendant.
William E. Seward, Village Atty., Rockville Centre, for the People.
ALBERT A. RUBIN, Village Justice.
This is a case of first impression.
On September 7, 1971, at 1:15 a.m. the defendant, 16 years of age, received two summonses, for alleged violations committed within the Incorporated Village of Rockville Centre, both returnable in the Village Court of Rockville Centre. On the one, the charge was that the defendant was travelling 55 miles an hour in a 30 mile zone, in violation of Section 1180 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law. On the second, the defendant was charged with a violation of Section 501 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law in that he did not have a license.
After entering a plea of not guilty, defendant's counsel stated that on the date set for trial, when a District Attorney would be present in Court, he intended to make a motion under Section 170.55 of the CPL for 'an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal'. On the trial date, with the District Attorney present, counsel so moved. The matter was argued and both sides submitted memorandums.
[68 Misc.2d 699] Section 170.55 of the Criminal Procedure Law which went into effect on September 1, 1971, provides that:
'Upon or after arraignment in a local criminal court upon an information, a simplified traffic information, a prosecutor's information or a misdemeanor complaint, and before entry of a plea of guilty thereto or commencement of a trial thereof, the court may, upon motion of the people or the defendant and with the consent of the other party, or upon the court's own motion with the consent of both the people and the defendant, order that the action be 'adjourned
Page 188
in contemplation of dismissal,' as prescribed in subdivision two.'and subdivision 2 reads:
'An adjournment in contemplation of dismissal is an adjournment of the action without date ordered with a view to ultimate dismissal of the accusatory instrument in furtherance of justice. Upon issuing such an order, the court must release the defendant on his own recognizance. Upon application of the people, made at any time not more than six months after the issuance of such order, the court must restore the case to the calendar and the action must thereupon proceed. If the case is not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Joseph P.
...for an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, People v. Ruggieri, 100 Misc.2d 585, 419 N.Y.S.2d 869, (compare People v. Glaubman, 68 Misc.2d 698, 327 N.Y.S.2d 186), it would appear that the sounder approach is that a court always has the independent discretion to grant or deny an applic......
-
U.S. v. Flowers, No. 96-CR-1064 (02)(JBW).
...(McKinney 1993 & Supp.1997). A legislatively created mechanism, ACD's became available by statute in 1971. See People v. Glaubman, 68 Misc.2d 698, 327 N.Y.S.2d 186, 187 (N.Y.Village Ct.1971) (court's ACD discretion Page 163 utilized in simple traffic informations). They are an offspring......
-
People v. Hurt
...can be read into an ACD as it involves no substantial right of the defendant. The court is referred to the case of People v. Glaubman, 68 Misc.2d 698, 327 N.Y.S.2d 186 (Village Ct. Rockville Centre, 1971) in which the court declined to grant an ACD for a traffic infraction. The court then w......
-
People v. Ruggieri
...in contemplation of dismissal". The defendant and his attorney joined in the motion. The Court is aware of People v. Glaubman, 68 Misc.2d 698, 327 N.Y.S.2d 186 (Village Ct. of Rockville Center, 1971) which declined to grant an ACD for a traffic violation. The judge in his opinion, by w......
-
People v. Joseph P.
...for an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, People v. Ruggieri, 100 Misc.2d 585, 419 N.Y.S.2d 869, (compare People v. Glaubman, 68 Misc.2d 698, 327 N.Y.S.2d 186), it would appear that the sounder approach is that a court always has the independent discretion to grant or deny an applic......
-
U.S. v. Flowers, No. 96-CR-1064 (02)(JBW).
...(McKinney 1993 & Supp.1997). A legislatively created mechanism, ACD's became available by statute in 1971. See People v. Glaubman, 68 Misc.2d 698, 327 N.Y.S.2d 186, 187 (N.Y.Village Ct.1971) (court's ACD discretion Page 163 utilized in simple traffic informations). They are an offspring......
-
People v. Hurt
...can be read into an ACD as it involves no substantial right of the defendant. The court is referred to the case of People v. Glaubman, 68 Misc.2d 698, 327 N.Y.S.2d 186 (Village Ct. Rockville Centre, 1971) in which the court declined to grant an ACD for a traffic infraction. The court then w......
-
People v. Ruggieri
...in contemplation of dismissal". The defendant and his attorney joined in the motion. The Court is aware of People v. Glaubman, 68 Misc.2d 698, 327 N.Y.S.2d 186 (Village Ct. of Rockville Center, 1971) which declined to grant an ACD for a traffic violation. The judge in his opinion, by w......