Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
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
Attorney(S)

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff,<BR> v. <BR>MICHAEL A. GUERRERIO, Defendant.

Harold, Salant, Strassfield & Spielberg (Jerold Rotbard of counsel), for defendant. Brian S. Stolar, Village Prosecutor of Village of North Hills, for plaintiff.

OPINION OF THE COURT

SOLOMON H. FRIEND, J. This case presents an issue of first impression, namely, whether in the absence of a valid arraignment a defendant's supporting deposition runs from the time the appearance ticket is issued and expires 30 days from the return date indicated on the appearance ticket, irrespective of whether the defendant has been arraigned. Indeed, the new language of CPL 100.25 was adopted to obviate situations which all too frequently had arisen prior to the amendment, where a defendant would personally appear in court years after the return date specified on the ticket, plead not guilty and request a supporting deposition. Now, under the amendment, the time frame within which a defendant may request a supporting deposition is severely circumscribed, and if the request is made before 30 days after the return date shown on the ticket, it is timely even if made by mail and without regard to whether the defendant has been validly arraigned. The simplified traffic informations are dismissed for failure of the People to supply supporting depositions, without prejudice to refiling of subsequent accusatory instruments. (See, People v Nuccio, 78 NY2d 102; People v Key, 87 Misc 2d 262, affd 45 NY2d 111 [1978].)

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

People v. Guerrerio
(Aug 5, 1999)