The following papers were read on this Motion: The People’s Notice of Motion Opposing Removal Pursuant to CPL §722.23 1 The Adolescent Offender’s Affirmation in Opposition to People’s Motion to Prevent Removal to Family Court 2 DECISION AND ORDER The defendant in this matter, T.P. (D.O.B. 0/00/0000) is charged as an Adolescent Offender (“AO”) in the Youth Part of the County Court in Nassau County. The People have moved for an Order pursuant to CPL §722.23(1) directing that this matter remain in the Youth Part and not be removed to the Family Court in Nassau County due to the existence of “extraordinary circumstances”. (CPL §722.23[1]). The AO has filed opposition to the People’s motion. The People’s Motion Opposing Removal is determined as follows: The AO is charged by way of separate felony complaints with one count of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree [Penal Law §155.35(1)] and one count of Grand Larceny in the Second Degree [Penal Law §155.40(1)]. The charges filed against the AO arise from incidents that are alleged to have occurred on July 24, 2021 at approximately 7:00 PM in K.P., G.N., Nassau County, New York, and at approximately 12:01AM in G.N., Nassau County, New York. The AO was arraigned in the Youth Part on July 26, 2021, at which time the People waived a statutory sixth-day appearance for review of the accusatory instrument and requested to file a motion opposing removal pursuant to CPL §722.23(1). The People thereafter filed the motion that is the subject of this Decision and Order. The People’s Motion Opposing Removal consists of the Supporting Affirmation of ADA David Santana, Esq. ["ADA Santana Aff. In Support"], with exhibits attached thereto. The People argue that extraordinary circumstances exist which warrant retaining the AO’s case in the Youth Part, to wit: 1) the AO’s criminal history and character; 2) the indicia of premeditation and planning in the commission of this offense; 3) the impact of a removal to the family court upon the confidence of the public in the criminal justice system; and 4) judicial economy. The AO’s counsel has submitted an Affirmation in Opposition, in which counsel argues that there is no statutory authority that would permit retaining the AO’s case in the Youth Part, because the People have failed to allege facts of a significant physical injury and have failed to establish the existence of extraordinary circumstances. (Affirmation in Opposition by Mary E. Murray, Esq., dated Aug. 30, 2021 ["Murray Aff. In Opp."],
3 to 7). FINDINGS OF FACT The People’s Motion Opposing Removal includes a supporting affirmation by ADA David R. Santana, Esq., in which counsel affirms that the AO, together with two adult co-defendants, is alleged to have stolen two vehicles over the course of two days starting July 24, 2021, in K.P., Nassau County, New York. (Affirmation in Support of Motion Opposing Removal Pursuant to CPL §722.23 by David R. Santana, Esq., dated August 9, 2021 ["Santana Aff. In Support of Motion"],
