Summary
In Morgenthau we denied prohibition, implicitly finding that the trial court had the discretionary power to place a case not ready for trial on the reserve calendar, as we suggested in People v Douglass (60 N.Y.2d 194), and also had the discretionary power to deny a motion by the District Attorney to restore the case to the active calendar until the People were ready to proceed to trial.
Summary of this case from Matter of Holtzman v. GoldmanOpinion
Argued January 14, 1987
Decided January 20, 1987
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Richard W. Wallach, J.
Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (Jane Levine, Lawrence S. Kahn, O. Peter Sherwood and Colvin W. Grannum of counsel), and Douglas S. Liebhafsky, Bernard W. Nussbaum and Richard H. Weiss for Jay Gold, Judge of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, appellant.
Steven G. Asin and Caesar Cirigliano for Legal Aid Society, intervenor-appellant.
Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Susan Corkery and Amyjane Rettew of counsel), respondent pro se.
Order reversed, without costs, and petition dismissed upon the ground that mandamus does not lie absent a clear right in petitioner to the relief sought.
Concur: Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE and HANCOCK, JR. Taking no part: Judge BELLACOSA.