Appeal from an order of the Justice Court of the Town of Wallkill, Orange County (Ray Shoemaker, J.), entered September 8, 2006. The order dismissed the simplified traffic information.

Order reversed on the law, simplified traffic information reinstated and matter remanded to the court below for all further proceedings.

In this prosecution based on a simplified traffic information, defendant appeared for trial on September 8, 2006. The court dismissed the simplified traffic information on the ground that the People failed to prosecute the matter. The trial court has no statutory or inherent authority to dismiss a criminal proceeding for failure to prosecute
(see People v Douglass, 60 NY2d 194, 206 [1983]; People v Tartaglione, 5 Misc 3d 126[A], 2004 NY Slip Op 51190[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]). We note that the District Attorney may delegate the prosecution of petty crimes and offenses to police officers (see People v Soddano, 86 NY2d 727 [1995]; People v Garcha, 10 Misc 3d 136[A], 2005 NY Slip Op 52130[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]). We further note that defendant asserts on appeal that the trooper was not present in court. However, the record is silent as to whether the trooper appeared in court, and, in any event, the court did not explicitly base its dismissal of the simplified traffic information on the trooper's absence. In view of the foregoing, the order dismissing the simplified traffic information is reversed and said accusatory instrument is reinstated.

Rudolph, P.J., Tanenbaum and Scheinkman, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: March 21, 2008