AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FRANK JAMES, Appellant.

Ordered that the judgments as amended are affirmed.

We reject the defendant's contention with respect to his conviction under Indictment No. 499/88, that he was entitled to a hearing with respect to the claim that his statutory and constitutional rights to a speedy trial were infringed. The record is clear that the prosecution announced its readiness for trial, as required, within six months after the commencement of the case (see, People v Giordano, 56 N.Y.2d 524, 525), and remained ready thereafter (see, People v Anderson, 66 N.Y.2d 529, 535-536). Accordingly, there was no violation of his right to a speedy trial pursuant to CPL 30.30. In addition, upon balancing all the factors to be considered in connection with the defendant's constitutional claim (see, People v Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442, 445), we find that the defendant's right to a speedy trial was not violated (see, People v Coleman, 178 A.D.2d 842, 843).

We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. JAMES
(Nov 23, 1992)