People v. Pichkur

CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
Citation382 N.Y.S.2d 565,52 A.D.2d 852
Decision Date03 May 1976
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Appellant, v. Samuel PICHKUR et al., Respondents.

Page 565

382 N.Y.S.2d 565
52 A.D.2d 852
The PEOPLE, etc., Appellant,
v.
Samuel PICHKUR et al., Respondents.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
May 3, 1976.

Eugene Gold, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Alan D. Rubinstein, Brooklyn, of counsel), for appellant.

Evseroff & Sonenshine, Brooklyn, for respondent Pichkur; Jeffrey A. Rabin, Brooklyn, for respondent Esposito; and Lewis D. Cohen, Brooklyn, for respondent Vitkus (Jeffrey A. Rabin, Brooklyn, of counsel) (one brief).

Page 566

Before MARTUSCELLO, Acting P.J., and RABIN, SHAPIRO, TITONE and HAWKINS, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 8, 1975, which, upon the court's own motion, dismissed the indictment (No. 5160/72) for failure to prosecute.

Order reversed, on the law, and indictment reinstated, without prejudice to defendants' right to move to dismiss the indictment pursuant to CPL 210.20. No findings of fact have been considered.

A motion to dismiss an indictment must be made in writing and upon reasonable notice to the People (CPL 210.45, subd. 1; People v. Trottie, 47 A.D.2d 751, 364 N.Y.S.2d 563; People v. Ryan, 42 A.D.2d 869, 347 N.Y.S.2d 216). It requires a hearing, at which time the court can determine whether there are any compelling factors necessitating a dismissal in the interest of justice and can adequately set forth its reasons therefor on the record (see People v. Trottie, supra). The procedural requirements of CPL 210.45 must be adhered to even when consideration of the dismissal is upon the court's own motion (People v. Kwok Ming Chan, 45 A.D.2d 613, 360 N.Y.S.2d 425; People v. Clayton, 41 A.D.2d 204, 342 N.Y.S.2d 106). The failure to comply with these requirements constituted reversible error (see People v. Trottie, supra).

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • People v. Rao
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • July 20, 1976
    ...subd. 1). A motion to dismiss, in writing and upon reasonable notice to the People, is necessary in such cases (see People v. Pichkur, 52 A.D.2d 852, 382 N.Y.S.2d 565 (2d Dept., 1976); People v. Trottie, 47 A.D.2d 751, 364 N.Y.S.2d 563). No such motion, or even one to simply inspect the Gra......
  • People v. Ray
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 6, 1977
    ...motion to dismiss an indictment must be made in writing and upon notice to the People (CPL 210.45, subd. 1; see, also, People v. Pichkur, 52 A.D.2d 852, 382 N.Y.S.2d 565; People v. Ryan, 42 A.D.2d 869, 347 N.Y.S.2d 216; People v. Trottie, 47 A.D.2d 751, 364 N.Y.S.2d 563). The failure to com......
  • People v. Jack
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 18, 1986
    ...893, 461 N.Y.S.2d 401; People v. Ray, 58 A.D.2d 588, 395 N.Y.S.2d 105; People v. Orr, 53 A.D.2d 634, 384 N.Y.S.2d 478; People v. Pichkur, 52 A.D.2d 852, 382 N.Y.S.2d Page 742 We find unpersuasive the defendant's argument that the instant indictment was dismissed upon the court's own motion.......
  • People v. Ramos
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • May 2, 1983
    ...is considering the dismissal of an indictment upon its own motion (People v. Clayton, 41 A.D.2d 204, 342 N.Y.S.2d 106; People v. Pichkur, 52 A.D.2d 852, 382 N.Y.S.2d 565; People v. Vega, 80 A.D.2d 867, 436 N.Y.S.2d 748; People v. Boynton, supra ). The failure of Criminal Term to adhere to t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • People v. Rao
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • July 20, 1976
    ...subd. 1). A motion to dismiss, in writing and upon reasonable notice to the People, is necessary in such cases (see People v. Pichkur, 52 A.D.2d 852, 382 N.Y.S.2d 565 (2d Dept., 1976); People v. Trottie, 47 A.D.2d 751, 364 N.Y.S.2d 563). No such motion, or even one to simply inspect the Gra......
  • People v. Jack
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 18, 1986
    ...893, 461 N.Y.S.2d 401; People v. Ray, 58 A.D.2d 588, 395 N.Y.S.2d 105; People v. Orr, 53 A.D.2d 634, 384 N.Y.S.2d 478; People v. Pichkur, 52 A.D.2d 852, 382 N.Y.S.2d Page 742 We find unpersuasive the defendant's argument that the instant indictment was dismissed upon the court's own motion.......
  • People v. Ray
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 6, 1977
    ...motion to dismiss an indictment must be made in writing and upon notice to the People (CPL 210.45, subd. 1; see, also, People v. Pichkur, 52 A.D.2d 852, 382 N.Y.S.2d 565; People v. Ryan, 42 A.D.2d 869, 347 N.Y.S.2d 216; People v. Trottie, 47 A.D.2d 751, 364 N.Y.S.2d 563). The failure to com......
  • People v. Vega
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 9, 1981
    ...subd. 1; People v. Kovzelove, 72 A.D.2d 608, 421 N.Y.S.2d 114; People v. Boynton, 67 A.D.2d 982, 413 N.Y.S.2d 431; People v. Pichkur, 52 A.D.2d 852, 382 N.Y.S.2d 565). A hearing is required in order for there to be a full development of the issues and an adequate opportunity for the People ......
  • 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