| People v Naim (Mohammed) |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 50270(U) [46 Misc 3d 150(A)] |
| Decided on March 4, 2015 |
| 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| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 (Linda Poust-Lopez, J.), dated February 18, 2014, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the accusatory instrument pursuant to CPL 30.30.
Per Curiam.
Order (Linda Poust-Lopez, J.), dated February 18, 2014, reversed, on the law, motion denied, information reinstated and matter remitted to Criminal Court for further proceedings.
Criminal Court erred in dismissing the accusatory instrument on speedy trial grounds. The People's July 26, 2013 statement of readiness to proceed to trial on charges of aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle (Vehicle and Traffic Law §511[1][a] and § 511 [2] [a] [iv]) and unlicensed driving (Vehicle and Traffic Law §509[1]) effectively stopped the "speedy trial" clock, inasmuch as the counts of the accusatory instrument pertaining to those charges were "deemed" converted to an information on that date (CPL 170.65[1]), and no basis is shown to conclude that the People were not then actually ready to proceed on the converted charges (see People v Kendzia, 64 NY2d 331, 337 [1985]; People v Carter, 91 NY2d 795, 798 [1988]). Any pleading defect relating to the subsequently dismissed charge of fifth-degree criminal possession of stolen property (Penal Law § 165.40) did not signify a lack of readiness to proceed on the properly converted counts, concerning which the People were "technically positioned" to go to trial (People v Terry, 225 AD2d 306, 307 [1996], lv denied 88 NY 886 [1996]; see also People v Dion, 93 NY2d 893 [1999]). We once again emphasize that speedy trial analysis "must, as a matter of course, often involve distinct considerations with respect to individual counts of a single accusatory instrument" (People v Gonzalez, 168 Misc 2d 136, 137 [1996], lv denied 88 NY2d 936 [1996]; People v Ausby, 46 Misc 3d 126[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 51763 [App Term, 1st Dept 2014]; each quoting from People v Minor, 149 Misc 2d 846, 848 [1989], lv denied 74 NY2d 666 [1989]). Giving proper effect to the People's July 26, 2013 readiness statement, it is indisputable that the People complied with their speedy trial obligations with respect to the properly converted counts.