People v. McCaskey.

• Decision Date: 26 February 1979
• Citation: 67 A.D.2d 1010,413 N.Y.S.2d 624
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Donald Piersol McCASKEY, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 624

413 N.Y.S.2d 624

67 A.D.2d 1010

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Donald Piersol McCASKEY, Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department.

February 26, 1979

Henry J. Boitel, New York City (Lissa Griffin, New York City, of counsel), for appellant. Patrick Henry, Dist. Atty., Riverhead (Vincent A. Malito, Riverhead, of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jaspan, J.), rendered April 26, 1976, convicting him of possession of weapons, etc., as a misdemeanor, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, indictment dismissed, and case remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for the purpose of entering an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50. This matter began with the defendant's arrest on April 15, 1972. His trial was delayed by the People's appeal from an order suppressing a weapon found in the defendant's car. The People prevailed on the appeal (People v. McCaskey, 46 A.D.2d 692, 360 N.Y.S.2d 270). That appeal was decided by this court in October, 1974. After winning, the prosecution did nothing to bring the case to trial and the defendant did nothing to prevent it from being brought to trial. The defendant finally pleaded guilty to possession of weapons, etc., as a misdemeanor, in March, 1976, after his motion to dismiss the indictment, on the ground that his right to a speedy trial was violated, was denied. The People offer no explanation for the delay and agree that the defendant is entitled to a dismissal of his indictment under the circumstances. We agree (see CPL 30.30, subd. 1, par. (a); People v. Staley, 41 N.Y.2d 789, 396 N.Y.S.2d 339, 364 N.E.2d 1111; People v. Singer, 44 N.Y.2d 241, 405 N.Y.S.2d 17, 376 N.E.2d 179). The court commends the District Attorney for his candor and forthrightness in consenting to a reversal of the judgment and dismissal of the indictment.

TITONE, J. P., and SUOZZI, O'CONNOR and MANGANO, JJ., concur.