People v. Smith, 2020-999 S CR

CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
Citation155 N.Y.S.3d 31 (Table),73 Misc.3d 136 (A)
Docket Number2020-999 S CR
Parties The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Stacey SMITH, Appellant.
Decision Date10 November 2021

73 Misc.3d 136 (A)
155 N.Y.S.3d 31 (Table)

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Stacey SMITH, Appellant.

2020-999 S CR

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York, Second Dept., 9 & 10 Jud. Dist.

Decided on November 10, 2021


Scott Lockwood, for appellant.

Suffolk County Traffic Prosecutor's Office (Justin W. Smiloff of counsel), for respondent.

PRESENT: ELIZABETH H. EMERSON, J.P., TIMOTHY S. DRISCOLL, HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.

ORDERED that the judgments of conviction are reversed, on the law, the fines, if paid, are remitted, and the matter is remitted to the District Court of Suffolk County, Suffolk County Traffic and Parking Violations Agency, for a new trial.

Defendant was charged in separate simplified traffic informations with failing to stop at a stop sign ( Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1172 [a] ) and speeding ( Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1180 [d] ), respectively. Defendant subsequently moved to dismiss the simplified traffic informations on statutory speedy trial grounds. By order dated August 17, 2020, the District Court of Suffolk County, Suffolk County Traffic and Parking Violations Agency (SCTPVA) denied the motion. On November 16, 2020, defendant failed to appear in court and, after a brief trial was conducted in both defendant's and his counsel's absence, the SCTPVA convicted defendant of the charges and imposed sentences.

On appeal, defendant initially contends that the SCTPVA should have granted his motion to dismiss the simplified traffic informations on statutory speedy trial grounds. However, the 30-day time period of CPL 30.30 (1) (d) is not applicable here as the only charge in each accusatory instrument was a traffic infraction (see People v Lopez , ––– Misc 3d ––––, 2021 NY Slip Op 51016[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2021]; People v Altman , 73 Misc 3d 127[A], 2021 NY Slip Op 50886[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2021]). Consequently, defendant's motion was properly denied.

Relying, in part, on a November 13, 2020 memorandum from the Chief Administrative Judge for the Courts of the State of New York, pertaining to "Revised Pandemic Procedures in the Trial Courts," which...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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