People v. Glaubman

• Decision Date: 09 December 1971
• Citation: 327 N.Y.S.2d 186,68 Misc.2d 698
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Michael GLAUBMAN.
• Court: New York Villiage Court

Page 186

327 N.Y.S.2d 186

68 Misc.2d 698

The PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Michael GLAUBMAN.

Village Court of Rockville Centre, Nassau County.

Dec. 9, 1971.

Morris H. Schneider, Garden City, for defendant.

William E. Seward, Village Atty., Rockville Centre, for the People.

OPINION OF THE COURT

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.

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 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 so restored within such six months period, the accusatory instrument is, at the expiration of such period, deemed to have been dismissed by the court in furtherance of justice.'

and section 100.10, subdivision 2 of the CPL defines a simplified traffic information as:

'A 'simplified traffic information' is a written accusation by a police officer, filed with a local criminal court, which charges a person with the commission of one or more traffic infractions and/or misdemeanors relating to traffic, and which, being in a brief or simplified form prescribed by the commissioner of motor vehicles, designates the offense or offenses charged but contains no factual allegations of an evidentiary nature supporting such charge or charges. It serves as a basis for commencement of a criminal action for such traffic offenses, alternative to the charging thereof by a regular information, and, under circumstances prescribed in section 100.25, it may serve, either in whole or in part, as a basis for prosecution of such charges.'

Section 170.55 is new. It has not yet been subjected to judicial determination. Its language makes it clear that the legislature in enacting this section contemplated the possibility of its application to a situation of this kind, for traffic informations are specifically mentioned in the...