The following papers numbered 1 to 2 were read and considered on the Defendant’s Xavier Puntiel’s motion to dismiss the accusatory instrument for allegedly violating defendant’s due process rights and for exceeding the speedy trial requirements pursuant to CPL §30.30, §30.20 and Civil Rights Law §12, the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution and CPL §170.30. Papers Numbered Notice of Motion and Affidavits Annexed 1 Affirmation/Affidavits in Opposition 2 DECISION AND ORDER Defendant was arraigned on April 6, 2019 on charges of Resisting Arrest (PL §205.30) and Obstructing Governmental Administration in the Second Degree (PL §195.05). As the highest charge was a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum imprisonment of one year, the People were required to be ready for trial within ninety days from the defendant’s arraignment. (See, People v. Price, 14 N.Y.3d 61, 64 [2010]; People v. Adrovic, 69 Misc. 3d 563 [Kings Co. Criminal Ct. 2020]; People v. Mashiyach, 70 Misc. 3d 456 [Kings Co. Criminal Ct. 2020]). Defendant now moves to dismiss, alleging that 370 days are chargeable to the People. The People opposed and argued that the defendant’s motion to dismiss must be summarily denied (CPL §30.30) as the People are within their 90-day requirement. The relevant chronology is set forth below: April 6, 2019 — November 26, 2019 Time Charged to the People — 234 days Defendant was arraigned on April 6, 2019 and the People declared “ready”. However, there is no dispute that the People requested adjournments until November 26, 2019. The Court finds 234 days are chargeable to the People. November 26, 2019 — March 2, 2020 Time Charged to the People — 0 days The People alleged, and the defendant does not deny, that defendant requested the adjournment to March 2, 2020 for a jury trial. Adjournments made at the request of the defendant are excluded under CPL §30.30 [4][b]. As such, no time is chargeable to the People. March 2, 2020 — March 17, 2020 Time Charged to the People — 0 days On March 2, 2020 the People filed a motion to consolidate and a schedule was set by the court. The court set March 31, 2020 for the defendant’s response, April 7, 2020 for the People’s reply and April 21, 2020 for the Court’s decision. However, on March 7, 2020 Governor Andrew Cuomo declared a state of emergency because of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the State of New York. After considering the motion schedule set by the Court and subsequent Executive Orders which served to toll the time limitations of CPL §30.30, the Court finds that no time is chargeable to the People, CPL §30.30[4][a]. March 17, 2020 — October 4, 2020 Time Charged to People — 0 days On March 17, 2020 the matter was administratively adjourned by the Court. On March 20, 2020, Governor Cuomo enacted Executive Order 202.8, tolling “any specific time limit for the commencement, filing or service of any legal action, notice, motion, or other process or proceeding, as prescribed by…the criminal procedure law…until April 19, 2020.” Executive Order 202.8 [9 NYCRR 8.202.8]. On September 4, 2020, the executive order was extended extended to October 4, 2020. Executive Order No. 202.55. On or about October 4, 2020 the Executive Order was modified as it pertains to speedy trial time, effectively reinstating the requirements under CPL 30.30 for Westchester County. Executive Order 202.55. At the time, Governor Cuomo’s Executive Orders issued in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic suspended CPL §30.30 deadlines. This time is accordingly excluded from the calculation and not chargeable to the People. (See, Executive Orders 202.14; 202.28; 202.38; 202.48; 202.55; 202.60 and 202.67. October 4, 2020 — October 19, 2020 Time Charged to People — 15 days On October 19, 2020 the matter was scheduled for a virtual conference and the People requested an adjournment to November 19, 2020. The People do not cite an exclusion. As such, 15 days are chargeable. October 19, 2020 — January 8, 2021 Time Charged to People — 81 days The People acknowledged that on October 19, 2020, they requested an adjournment until November 19, 2020 and all successive adjournments after until January 8, 2021. January 8, 2021 — June 1, 2021 Time Charged to People — 0 days There is no dispute that on January 8, 2021, the People filed and served their Certificate of Compliance and announced their readiness for trial. The People alleged that on that date, defendant requested an adjournment to February 8, 2021 and all successive adjournments until June 1, 2021. Adjournments “granted by the court at the request of, or with the consent of, the defendant or his counsel” are also excludable. The Court finds no time chargeable to the People for the above period. CPL §30.30 “[w]as enacted to serve the narrow purpose of insuring prompt prosecutorial readiness for trial, and its provisions must be interpreted accordingly.” People v. Sinistaj, 67 N.Y.2d 236, 239 [1986]. The movant bears the burden to demonstrate that the “prosecution failed to declare readiness within the statutorily prescribed time period…” People v. Luperon, 85 N.Y.2d 71, 77-78 [1995]. The burden then shifts to the People to establish that certain periods within that time should be excluded. People v. Amrhein, 128 A.D. 3d 1412 [4th Dept., 2015]. “The failure to declare readiness within the statutory time limit will result in dismissal of the prosecution, unless the People can demonstrate that certain time periods should be excluded.” Price, 14 N.Y.3d @63. The People declared ready after the Defendant’s arraignment on April 6, 2019. The declaration of “ready”, under the law as it existed at that time, was sufficient to stop the speedy trial clock. Accordingly, prior to January 1, 2020, the only time chargeable to the People are “post readiness delay[s]” that are “ attributable to [the People's] inaction and directly implicates their ability to proceed to trial.” People v. Catter, 91 N.Y. 2d 795 [1998]. If the delays did not directly impede the People’s ability to proceed to trial, same cannot be charged to the People. As of January 1, 2020, the People could not be ready and could not be found to be ready until they filed a Certificate of Compliance. CPL §245.50(3). These discovery reforms nullified the People’s previous statement of readiness as the reforms apply retroactively. (see, People v. DeMilio, 66 Misc. 2d 759 [Duchess Co. Ct. 2020]; People v. Roland, 67 Misc. 3d 330 [N.Y. Crim. Ct. 2020]). The People filed their Certificate of Compliance and announced ready for trial on January 8, 2021. Based on this Court’s calculations, 330 days are chargeable to the People from the time of the defendant’s April 6, 2019 arraignment through the People’s filing of a Certificate of Compliance on January 8, 2021. As the People had ninety (90) days to declare ready and as the People failed to demonstrate statutory exclusions of the time, the Defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted. Dated: March 8, 2021
