People v. Ray
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Writing for the Court | Before MARTUSCELLO |
| Citation | 58 A.D.2d 588,395 N.Y.S.2d 105 |
| Decision Date | 06 June 1977 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Appellant, v. Howard RAY, Respondent. |
Page 105
v.
Howard RAY, Respondent.
Eugene Gold, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Laura A. Brevetti, Brooklyn, of counsel), for appellant.
Jeff L. Greenup, New York City, for respondent.
Before MARTUSCELLO, J. P., and LATHAM, SHAPIRO and O'CONNOR, JJ.
Page 106
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered August 17, 1976, which granted defendant-respondent's oral motion to dismiss the indictment for failure to prosecute.
Order reversed, on the law, and indictment reinstated.
By statute, a 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 comply with this requirement, unless consented to by the District Attorney, is reversible error (see People v. Rao, 53 A.D.2d 904, 386 N.Y.S.2d 441; People v. Orr, 53 A.D.2d 634, 384 N.Y.S.2d 478; People v. Smith, 53 A.D.2d 652, 384 N.Y.S.2d 488). In this case the District Attorney opposed the application. Furthermore, the basic speedy-trial contention of defendant lacks merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Jordan
...to dismiss an indictment for failure to prosecute should generally be denied as brought in an inappropriate fashion (People v. Ray, 58 A.D.2d 588, 395 N.Y.S.2d 105), the issue itself will not be considered waived without further indicia demonstrating that such is the defendant's intent (see......
-
People v. Fattizzi
...supra), inasmuch as compliance with the statute is required unless an oral motion is consented to by the People (see People v. Ray, 58 A.D.2d 588, 395 N.Y.S.2d 105). We are aware of the difficulty involved since the supporting deposition may be timely served until the day preceding the tria......
-
People v. Ortreger, No. 2014–1667 D CR.
...it was not made in writing, which requirement, we note, can be waived (see People v. Jennings, 69 N.Y.2d 103, 113 [1986] ; People v. Ray, 58 A.D.2d 588 [1977] ).Defendant's legal insufficiency claim is preserved for appellate review since his attorney moved to dismiss the charge following t......
-
People v. Jack
...reversible error to grant such a motion upon oral application (see, People v. Banks, 93 A.D.2d 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 ......
-
People v. Jordan
...to dismiss an indictment for failure to prosecute should generally be denied as brought in an inappropriate fashion (People v. Ray, 58 A.D.2d 588, 395 N.Y.S.2d 105), the issue itself will not be considered waived without further indicia demonstrating that such is the defendant's intent (see......
-
People v. Fattizzi
...supra), inasmuch as compliance with the statute is required unless an oral motion is consented to by the People (see People v. Ray, 58 A.D.2d 588, 395 N.Y.S.2d 105). We are aware of the difficulty involved since the supporting deposition may be timely served until the day preceding the tria......
-
People v. Ortreger, No. 2014–1667 D CR.
...it was not made in writing, which requirement, we note, can be waived (see People v. Jennings, 69 N.Y.2d 103, 113 [1986] ; People v. Ray, 58 A.D.2d 588 [1977] ).Defendant's legal insufficiency claim is preserved for appellate review since his attorney moved to dismiss the charge following t......
-
People v. Jack
...reversible error to grant such a motion upon oral application (see, People v. Banks, 93 A.D.2d 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 ......