Judge Michael D. Kitsis

Read Full-Text Decision

Chiang, charged with criminal possession of stolen property, among other things, moved for dismissal on speedy trial grounds. Felony charges were dismissed on prosecutors’ motion, requiring them to be trial ready within 90 days of the filing of the new instrument. The parties’ differed regarding Dec. 5, 2016 and March 15, 2017 adjournments but agreed only 48 days were chargeable to prosecutors. The court noted the issue on the rule regarding adjournments after a defendant’s waiver of hearings and discovery appeared to be an apparent issue of first impression in Kings County; other jurisdictions, persuasively, held the period after defendant waived motions was not an adjournment resulting from motion practice, thus, not excludable under CPL §30.30(4)(a). As prosecutors declared their trial readiness on Dec. 5, they met their initial speedy trial burden to be ready before 90 days elapsed, making the post-readiness adjournment excludable. Prosecutors served their subsequent statement of readiness but not on Chiang’s attorney of record—never effectively notifying Chiang of their readiness—and the filing had no legal effect. The entire time from March 15 to April 19, 2017 was charged to prosecutors but only 83 days total were charged and dismissal was denied.