| People v Brooks (Kieth) |
| 2019 NY Slip Op 50859(U) [63 Misc 3d 158(A)] |
| Decided on June 3, 2019 |
| Appellate Term, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
The People appeal from an order of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Armando Montano, J.), dated November 29, 2016, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the accusatory instrument pursuant to CPL 30.30.
Per Curiam.
Order (Armando Montano, J.), dated November 29, 2016, affirmed.
Defendant's CPL 30.30 motion to dismiss was properly granted. The People failed to convert the accusatory instrument into an information within the speedy trial period, since the statement of the translator filed with the supporting deposition of Carlos Ayala did not comply with CPLR 2101(b) (see Uniform Rules for Trial Courts [22 NYCRR] § 200.3 [papers filed in a criminal court must comply with provisions of CPLR 2101]). The statement was not in affidavit form, and it neither stated the qualifications of the translator nor that the translation was accurate (see People v Edwards, 59 Misc 3d 148[A], 2018 NY Slip Op 50787[U][App Term, 1st Dept 2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 1003 [2018],citing Eustaquio v 860 Cortlandt Holdings, Inc., 95 AD3d 548 [2012]).
We also reject the People's contention that a certificate of translation was not required to convert the accusatory instrument. Under these circumstances, when the People filed a statement of a translator simultaneously with the supporting deposition, they provided sufficient indicia of the witness's inability to speak or read English (see People v Hernandez, 47 Misc 3d 51 [App Term, 2nd Dept 9th & 10th Jud Dists, 2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 1073 [2015]; cf. Matter of Shaquana S., 9 AD3d 466 [2004]). Criminal Court then providently exercised its discretion in requiring a proper certificate of translation to be produced in order to convert the complaint into an information (see People v Hernandez, 47 Misc 3d at 54). Moreover, despite being afforded several opportunities to comply with the court's simple request, the People failed to produce a proper certificate of translation from the translator employed by the Bronx District Attorney's Office.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.