()

Judge Judy H. Kim

Read Full-Text Decision

Mitselos was charged with driving while ability impaired by alcohol in violation of Vehicle & Traffic Law §1192(1)—a traffic infraction, and moved for dismissal under VTL §227(2). He also moved for dismissal on constitutional speedy trial grounds, but the court concluded while prosecutors conceded 129 days were chargeable to them, as Mitselos did not contend his defense was impaired by the delay, nor was there an extended period of pre-trial incarceration, he was not deprived his constitutional rights to a speedy trial. Also, while §227(2) empowered a DMV hearing officer to dismiss an infraction charge where prosecutors were not ready to proceed with a scheduled DMV hearing, the provisions were strictly applicable to the administrative forum of a DMV Hearing. Hence, as the instant action was commenced in this court via a misdemeanor complaint, and continued to proceed under the jurisdiction of the Criminal Court—despite the prior dismissal of the misdemeanor charges—the action was venued in the court and not before a DMV administrative tribunal. As such, the court concluded the procedures governing the administrative tribunals did not apply here, thus, dismissal of the §1192(1) charge under §227(2) was denied.

Judge Judy H. Kim

Read Full-Text Decision

Mitselos was charged with driving while ability impaired by alcohol in violation of Vehicle & Traffic Law §1192(1)—a traffic infraction, and moved for dismissal under VTL §227(2). He also moved for dismissal on constitutional speedy trial grounds, but the court concluded while prosecutors conceded 129 days were chargeable to them, as Mitselos did not contend his defense was impaired by the delay, nor was there an extended period of pre-trial incarceration, he was not deprived his constitutional rights to a speedy trial. Also, while §227(2) empowered a DMV hearing officer to dismiss an infraction charge where prosecutors were not ready to proceed with a scheduled DMV hearing, the provisions were strictly applicable to the administrative forum of a DMV Hearing. Hence, as the instant action was commenced in this court via a misdemeanor complaint, and continued to proceed under the jurisdiction of the Criminal Court—despite the prior dismissal of the misdemeanor charges—the action was venued in the court and not before a DMV administrative tribunal. As such, the court concluded the procedures governing the administrative tribunals did not apply here, thus, dismissal of the §1192(1) charge under §227(2) was denied.