People v. Hernandez, 2012-1965 S CR

CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
Citation47 Misc.3d 51,2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 25058,7 N.Y.S.3d 822
Docket Number2012-1965 S CR
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Carlos HERNANDEZ, Respondent.
Decision Date17 February 2015

47 Misc.3d 51
7 N.Y.S.3d 822
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 25058

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant
v.
Carlos HERNANDEZ, Respondent.

2012-1965 S CR

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Dept., 9 and 10 Judicial Dist.

Feb. 17, 2015.


7 N.Y.S.3d 823

Thomas J. Spota III, District Attorney, Riverhead (Lauren Tan of counsel), for appellant.

Robert C. Mitchell, Legal Aid Society, Riverhead (Alfred J. Cicale of counsel), for respondent.

PRESENT: IANNACCI, J.P., MARANO and GARGUILO, JJ.

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (Paul M. Hensley, J.), dated April 11, 2012. The order granted defendant's motion to dismiss the accusatory instrument.

47 Misc.3d 52

ORDERED that the order is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by providing that defendant's motion to dismiss the accusatory instrument is granted unless within 60 days of the date of this decision and order the People file and serve the necessary certificates of

7 N.Y.S.3d 824

translation as set forth in the decision herein; in the event the People timely serve and file the certificates, the motion is denied.

On January 29, 2012, the People charged defendant with forcible touching (Penal Law § 130.52 ) based on an inculpatory statement by defendant and the supporting depositions of the victim and two witnesses to the incident. In his statement, defendant expressed his preference to be questioned in Spanish, notwithstanding that he “speak[s] enough English to communicate with [the police],” and, in their depositions, the victim and one of the witnesses acknowledged that they are Spanish-speaking and cannot read or write English. The English language versions of the statements of defendant and the non-English speaking deponents recite that the statements had been translated orally into their native language, and that they had affirmed the truth of the facts set forth in the English versions on that basis.

Defendant moved to dismiss the accusatory instrument, arguing that, absent certificates of translation by the officers who had taken the statements attesting to their competence as translators, the English language versions of the statement of defendant, which contained significant admissions, and the statements of the victim and the witness, who did not understand

47 Misc.3d 53

English, remained hearsay, rendering the accusatory instrument, a purported information, facially defective. Before the motion was decided, the People filed a superseding accusatory instrument, now relying solely on defendant's statement and that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • People v. Rodriguez-Alas, 2019BX006360
    • United States
    • New York Criminal Court
    • October 2, 2019
    ...an affidavit of translation for a Spanish-speaking complainant, opting only to annex it to motion response papers]; People v. Hernandez , 47 Misc. 3d 51, 7 N.Y.S.3d 822 [App. Term, 2d Dept. 2015] [holding that a trial court may either dismiss based on latent defect or order a certificate of......
  • People v. Maslowski, 2018-11486
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • October 28, 2020
    ...[Crim. Ct. Kings County] ; People v. Reyes, 60 Misc.3d 245, 249–250, 76 N.Y.S.3d 385 [Crim. Ct., Queens County] ; People v. Hernandez, 47 Misc.3d 51, 53–54, 7 N.Y.S.3d 822 [App. Term, 2d Dept., 9th & 10th Jud. Dists.] ; People v. Benitez, 15 Misc.3d 1122(A), 2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 50798[U],......
  • People v. Brooks
    • United States
    • New York Criminal Court
    • November 29, 2016
    ...instrument, this court, in its discretion, ordered the People to file a valid certificate of translation. See, People v. Hernandez, 47 Misc.3d 51, 7 N.Y.S.3d 822 (App.Term, 2d Dept. 9th & 10th Jud.Dists.2015). Despite being given ample opportunity to file a valid certificate of translat......
  • 133 Plus 24 Sanford Ave. Realty Corp. v. Xiu Lan Ni, 2012-2033 Q C
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
    • February 23, 2015
    ...Restaurant Group Inc., 7 Misc.3d 130[A], 2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 50539[U], 2005 WL 856932 [App. Term, 9th & 10th Jud. Dists. 2005] ).7 N.Y.S.3d 822 “It is well settled that injunctive relief is generally not available in a summary proceeding brought in the Civil Court” (Waxman v. Patabbe, In......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • People v. Rodriguez-Alas, 2019BX006360
    • United States
    • New York Criminal Court
    • October 2, 2019
    ...an affidavit of translation for a Spanish-speaking complainant, opting only to annex it to motion response papers]; People v. Hernandez , 47 Misc. 3d 51, 7 N.Y.S.3d 822 [App. Term, 2d Dept. 2015] [holding that a trial court may either dismiss based on latent defect or order a certificate of......
  • People v. Maslowski, 2018-11486
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • October 28, 2020
    ...[Crim. Ct. Kings County] ; People v. Reyes, 60 Misc.3d 245, 249–250, 76 N.Y.S.3d 385 [Crim. Ct., Queens County] ; People v. Hernandez, 47 Misc.3d 51, 53–54, 7 N.Y.S.3d 822 [App. Term, 2d Dept., 9th & 10th Jud. Dists.] ; People v. Benitez, 15 Misc.3d 1122(A), 2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 50798[U],......
  • People v. Brooks
    • United States
    • New York Criminal Court
    • November 29, 2016
    ...instrument, this court, in its discretion, ordered the People to file a valid certificate of translation. See, People v. Hernandez, 47 Misc.3d 51, 7 N.Y.S.3d 822 (App.Term, 2d Dept. 9th & 10th Jud.Dists.2015). Despite being given ample opportunity to file a valid certificate of translat......
  • 133 Plus 24 Sanford Ave. Realty Corp. v. Xiu Lan Ni, 2012-2033 Q C
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
    • February 23, 2015
    ...Restaurant Group Inc., 7 Misc.3d 130[A], 2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 50539[U], 2005 WL 856932 [App. Term, 9th & 10th Jud. Dists. 2005] ).7 N.Y.S.3d 822 “It is well settled that injunctive relief is generally not available in a summary proceeding brought in the Civil Court” (Waxman v. Patabbe, In......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT