People v. Rediker
| Decision Date | 23 November 1983 |
| Citation | 97 A.D.2d 928,470 N.Y.S.2d 734 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Harry T. REDIKER, Defendant. Marvin I. Honig, as Attorney for the County of Rensselaer, Appellant; Charles J. Wilcox, as District Attorney for the County of Rensselaer, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Marvin I. Honig, County Atty., Troy (Gordon R. Mayo, Troy, of counsel), for appellant Honig.
Charles J. Wilcox, Dist. Atty., Troy (Richard L. Nabozny, Troy, of counsel), for respondent Wilcox.
Before SWEENEY, J.P., and MIKOLL, YESAWICH, WEISS and LEVINE, JJ.
Appeal from an order of the County Court of Rensselaer County, entered February 15, 1983, which appointed a special prosecutor for the purpose of preparing a brief and arguing the appeal on behalf of the People of the State of New York in a criminal prosecution against defendant.
The facts are not in dispute. The underlying action concerns the arrest and conviction of defendant Harry Rediker for a violation of section 1163 (subd. [a] ) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, i.e., making an unsafe turn. After conviction, he was fined $15 and appealed to the County Court. When there was no answering brief filed by the People, Rediker moved to vacate the conviction. Subsequently, the Brunswick Town Attorney sought by order to show cause to have the court direct an agency of the County of Rensselaer to file a brief in response to Rediker's papers and to prosecute the appeal on behalf of the People. After a hearing, where the District Attorney denied responsibility for prosecuting the appeal and the county attorney contended that he had no authority to handle the matter, the County Judge ordered the appointment of a special prosecutor to handle the appeal pursuant to the provisions of section 701 of the County Law. It is from this order that the County of Rensselaer, through the county attorney, appeals.
At the outset, we note that we are concerned with an appeal of an interlocutory order in a criminal action. While defendant properly appealed his conviction to Rensselaer County Court (see CPL 450.60, subd. 3), it is the county that attempts to appeal the order in question. The right to appeal is statutory and, absent specific authorization by a statute, no appeal lies . The Criminal Procedure Law authorizes no such appeal. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Nuzzi
...herein would be reviewable only by the prosecutor commencing an Article 78 proceeding in the Appellate Division. (CPLR 506 People v. Rediker, 97 A.D.2d 928, 470 N.Y.S.2d 734, citing 6 Zett, N.Y.Crim.Prac., par. 53.1 The legislature has not authorized a special proceeding to bring on an appl......
-
Murphy on Behalf of Rensselaer County v. Dwyer
...Court which appointed a special prosecutor to prepare a brief and argue an appeal by a defendant in the case entitled People v. Rediker, 97 A.D.2d 928, 470 N.Y.S.2d 734. We decline, however, to grant that portion of the petition which seeks an order directing respondent Rensselaer County Di......
-
Morgenthau v. Crane
...of the special prosecutor. (Matter of Schumer v. Holtzman, supra, 60 N.Y.2d at 54, 467 N.Y.S.2d 182, 454 N.E.2d 522; People v. Rediker, 97 A.D.2d 928, 470 N.Y.S.2d 734.) Accordingly, the petition brought pursuant to CPLR Article 78 in the nature of a writ of prohibition, dated July 3, 1985,......
- Atchinson v. Cohoes Bowling Arena, Inc.