top of page

DWI, Driving While Intoxicated, Attorney - Speedy Trial Dismissal

New York DWI Attorneys, pay attention to mandatory disclosure under the New York Criminal Procedure Law. New York Driving While Intoxicated cases, or DWI cases can be dismissed if the People fail to provide statutory discovery to the accused.

Here, in People v. Quinlan, 2021 N.Y. Slip Op 30322 (Crim. Ct. 2021), the case was dismissed for Speedy Trial violations, a great job by this New York DWI Attorney. The misdemeanor complaint was filed with an Aggravated Driving While Intoxicated, an unclassified misdemeanor under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192[2-a][a], Driving While Intoxicated (Per Se), an unclassified misdemeanor under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192[2], Driving While Intoxicated (Common Law), an unclassified misdemeanor under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192[3], and Driving While Ability Impaired, a traffic infraction under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192[1]. Nearly every VTL charge the New York City Police Department could muster in this New York City DWI Case.

A big question arises in the New York DWI/New York City DWI case as to when does the case start - this is important because it dispositive of when the New York statutory Speedy Trial rights start: "A criminal action is commenced by the filing of an accusatory instrument against a defendant (see CPL 1.20[17]). It is settled law that the date on which an accusatory instrument is filed is excluded from a 30.30 computation (see People v. Stiles, 70 NY2d 765, 767 [1987])."

The Court in People v. Quinlan, 2021 N.Y. Slip Op 30322 (Crim. Ct. 2021) states the law quite succinctly:

"In the absence of a waiver, a defendant has the right to be prosecuted on an information, (see CPL 170.65 [1]), and the People, as of January 1, 2020, cannot be ready for trial unless all counts in the misdemeanor complaint have been converted to an information (see id. 30.30 [5-a]). An information is facially sufficient when, among other things, 'non-hearsay allegations of the factual part ... and/or of any supporting depositions establish, if true, every element of the offense charged and the defendant's commission thereof' (id. 100.40[1][c]; see also 100.40[1][a]-[b]; 100.15).' "

In addition, "on January 1, 2020, an amended CPL 30.30 statute went into effect ... and explicitly brought traffic infractions within its ambit" (People v. Galindo, 2020 NY Slip Op 20147, *2 [App Term, 2d Dept, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2020]; see also id. 30.30 [1][e]). Thus, "in a criminal case, such as this, where a defendant is charged with both a misdemeanor for which more than three months' incarceration is possible and a traffic infraction, the People are provided with a 90-day `clock' within which they must be ready for trial" (Galindo, 2020 NY Slip Op 20147, *2-3).

The DWI Criminal Defense Attorney argues, and the Court agrees, that the People were not ready within the timeframe set forth by the law. The 'clock,' so to say, required the People to provide evidence (with or without a written demand) within ninety (90) days. Among other provisions of the New York Criminal Procedure Law, the newly enacted article 245 is specific to the New York DWI matters, requiring the production of certain reports, certified records, evidence that the intoxilyzer device was properly working, etc. Here, the People failed to, among other things provide the New York DWI evidence in a timely matter, so the New York DWI attorney moved to dismiss.

Quite simply, "In this action, the People filed an accusatory instrument, specifically, a misdemeanor complaint, with the Court on November 19, 2019, and Defendant was arraigned on the complaint on the same date. At Defendant's arraignment, the Court determined that the People needed a supporting deposition to convert the misdemeanor complaint to an information, since the complaint clearly contained hearsay allegations, and adjourned the action to January 7, 2020, for conversion....Defendant has shown that 91 days are chargeable to the People " With over ninety days in the New York DWI prosecution charged to the people, the case must be dismissed.

The case is People v. Quinlan, 2021 N.Y. Slip Op 30322 (Crim. Ct. 2021), "The burden then shifted to the People to establish that certain time should be excluded from the 30.30 computation. This the People failed to do, and, therefore, that part of Defendant's motion to dismiss the information on speedy-trial ground is granted..."

Cory H. Morris, Esq. New York and Florida, Injury, Addiction, Accident, Call the Law Offices of Cory H. Morris, 631-450-2515 (NYS) (954) 998-2918 (FLA) if you are facing any accusation.

Driving while intoxicated, DWI, DWAI charges, call an attorney with knowledge of criminal defense, addiction, trial and discovery practices, Call the Law Offices of Cory H. Morris, 631-450-2515 (NYS) (954) 998-2918 (FLA).


Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Search By Tags
No tags yet.
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square
bottom of page