In People v. Sibblies,1 the Court of Appeals has revisited New York’s speedy trial statute and addressed certain strategies that have come under criticism by courts and members of the defense bar. Specifically, the court addressed the common scenario where the People file an off-calendar statement of readiness and subsequently announce in court that they are not ready to proceed. Thus, it is argued, in some cases the declaration of readiness is illusory and does not accurately reflect the People’s position.
Addressing this scenario, members of the court have issued two, three-judge concurrences that found a certificate of readiness invalid based upon different rationales. This column will attempt to discuss the decision’s precedential value.
