People v. Washington
| Decision Date | 15 December 1977 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | , 372 N.E.2d 795 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Gary WASHINGTON, Appellant. |
Order reversed, and the indictment dismissed. The seven-month delay between defendant's felony indictment and his arrest constitutes a denial of the statutory right to a speedy trial (CPL 30.30, subd. 1, par. (a)).
The People contend that the delay was caused by "exceptional circumstances", and hence falls within a statutory exception (CPL 30.30, subd. 4, par. (g)). They urge as an excuse an ongoing narcotics investigation. However, the proof of such investigation was deficient. No activity of any significance was shown but only a variety of unsatisfactory excuses why the investigation did not proceed. Statutory examples of exceptional circumstances would entail at least probable availability of new evidence within a reasonable period of time, and a justified need for additional time to prepare the People's case. The statutory exception, then, if it is to be given reasonable effect and it is to fulfill the legislative purpose, must be limited to instances in which the prosecution's inability to proceed is justified by the purposes of the investigation and credible, vigorous activity in pursuing it.
Since the indictment must be dismissed, it is unnecessary to determine whether the court's erroneous characterization of a defense witness, in a supplementary charge, as "an admitted interested party", would otherwise require a new trial.
Order reversed, etc.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Chardon
...to make the complainant available ( see People v. Zirpola, 57 N.Y.2d 706, 708, 454 N.Y.S.2d 702, 440 N.E.2d 787; People v. Washington, 43 N.Y.2d 772, 774, 401 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 372 N.E.2d 795). In light of the foregoing, the defendant was not entitled to dismissal of the indictment on statutor......
-
People v. Juan R.
...is justified by the purposes of the investigation and credible, vigorous activity in pursuing it." (See People v. Washington, 43 N.Y.2d 772, 774, 401 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 372 N.E.2d 795 (1977)). The People argue that this case is analogous to People v. Etheridge, 116 Misc.2d 98, 455 N.Y.S.2d 201 ......
-
People v. Gonzalezyunga
...for practical reasons beyond their control cannot proceed with a legally viable prosecution (see e.g. People v. Washington , 43 NY2d 772, 401 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 372 N.E.2d 795 [1977] ; People v. Zirpola , 57 NY2d 706, 708, 454 N.Y.S.2d 702, 440 N.E.2d 787 [1982] )." People v. Price, supra. at 6......
-
People v. Gonzalezyunga
...for practical reasons beyond their control cannot proceed with a legally viable prosecution (see e.g. People v. Washington, 43 NY2d 772, 401 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 372 N.E.2d 795 [1977]; People v. Zirpola, 57 NY2d 706, 708, 454 N.Y.S.2d 702, 440 N.E.2d 787 [1982])." People v. Price, supra. at 64, 8......