From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rarback

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 16, 1976
358 N.E.2d 267 (N.Y. 1976)

Opinion

Argued October 13, 1976

Decided November 16, 1976

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, BURTON ROBERTS, J.

Irving Anolik for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Henry J. Steinglass and Peter L. Zimroth of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM. The order at the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Notwithstanding the extended over-all elapsed time, all the circumstances in this somewhat unusual case, including, inter alia, the protracted pendency of appeals in directly related cases involving the admissibility in this case of crucial evidence, properly moved the courts below to conclude that this defendant was not denied his constitutional or statutory right to a speedy trial.

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Rarback

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 16, 1976
358 N.E.2d 267 (N.Y. 1976)
Case details for

People v. Rarback

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARTIN RARBACK…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 16, 1976

Citations

358 N.E.2d 267 (N.Y. 1976)
358 N.E.2d 267
389 N.Y.S.2d 574

Citing Cases

People v. Scott

The prosecutor was entitled to await the outcome of the appeal before subjecting both the defendant and his…

People v. Passero

The People may not rely on the existence of defense motions made in connection with another case to excuse…