From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 16, 1996
227 A.D.2d 237 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

May 16, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie Wittner, J.).


Once a criminal action is commenced against a defendant, the People must be prepared to proceed to trial within six months, plus excludable time, from the date of defendant's arraignment (CPL 30.30 [a]; [4]; People v. Sinistaj, 67 N.Y.2d 236, 239; People v. Sigismundi, 222 A.D.2d 382, 383). Since defendant herein was arraigned on May 10, 1992, the six-month period amounts to 184 days. The trial court found that because 223 days were chargeable to the People, the indictment must be dismissed. We disagree.

On June 30, 1992, the case was adjourned "for Defense motions" to August 4, 1992, a period of 35 days. Although the hearing court found this period to be includable, it was, in fact, excludable as time expended for motion practice ( see, People v Buong Sai, 223 A.D.2d 439-440; People v. Bissereth, 194 A.D.2d 317, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 714).

Further, the 133-day period from August 4, 1992 to December 15, 1992 is excludable, as expressly conceded by defendant ( see, People v. Boyd, 189 A.D.2d 433, 438, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 714; see also, People v. Yanez, 218 A.D.2d 719, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 875). As a result, a total of 168 days were improperly charged to the People and, accordingly, the indictment should not have been dismissed.

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 16, 1996
227 A.D.2d 237 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. POLO BROWN, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 16, 1996

Citations

227 A.D.2d 237 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
642 N.Y.S.2d 281

Citing Cases

People v. Reyes

05; People v. Goode, supra), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. In any event, the period…

People v. Reyes

05[2]; People v. Goode, supra ), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. In any event, the…