AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. HOWARD RAY, Respondent.

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; People v Ryan, 42 A.D.2d 869; People v Trottie, 47 A.D.2d 751). 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; People v Orr, 53 A.D.2d 634; People v Smith, 53 A.D.2d 652). In this case the District Attorney opposed the application. Furthermore, the basic speedy-trial contention of defendant lacks merit. Martuscello, J.P., Latham, Shapiro and O'Connor, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. RAY
(Jun 6, 1977)