Appeals court reinstates felony charge dropped on speedy trial grounds

A state appeals court has reinstated a felony charge by reversing a lower court ruling that dismissed the case on speedy trial grounds.

In May 2022, Westchester County Court Judge Robert J. Prisco granted a defense motion to dismiss a felony indictment on the ground that he was deprived of his statutory right to a speedy trial.

Under state law, the prosecution must bring a felony case to trial within six months.

In a decision released Wednesday, the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court, Second Department, reinstated the indictment and sent the case back to Westchester County Court.

On Sept. 18, 2020, the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office filed a felony complaint against the defendant, Angel Fuentes. On Nov. 29, 2021, Fuentes was arraigned. Fuentes then moved to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds.

Fuentes claimed that for the period from Sept. 18, 2020, to Nov. 29, 2021, the total amount of time chargeable to the prosecution exceeded the six-month period.

The prosecution contends that the 25-day period from Dec. 30, 2020, to Jan. 25, 2021, was excludable because of an executive order issued by then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

In a May 20, 2022, order, Prisco charged the prosecution with 192 days and granted the defendant’s motion. The prosecutor appealed and the Second Department reversed Prisco’s decision.

The prosecutor was required to be ready for trial within six months of the commencement of the criminal action.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on Dec. 30, 2020, Cuomo issued an executive order which suspended part of criminal procedure law “to the extent necessary to toll any time periods contained therein for the period during which the criminal action is proceeding on the basis of a felony complaint through arraignment on the indictment or on a superior court information and thereafter shall not be tolled.”

Successive executive orders extended the order through May 23, 2021.

“Contrary to the determination of the County Court, while it was in effect, Executive Order No. 202.87 constituted a toll of the time within which the People must be ready for trial for the period from the date a felony complaint was filed through the date of a defendant’s arraignment on the indictment, with no requirement that the People establish necessity for a toll in each particular case,” the Second Department wrote.

Because Executive Order No. 202.87 served to toll the speedy trial statute, the 25 days from Dec. 30, 2020, to Jan. 25, 2021, were not chargeable to the People.

Consequently, the total amount of time chargeable to the People did not exceed the six-month period mandated by CPL 30.30. Therefore, the County Court should have denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment, the court ruled.

[email protected] / (585) 232-2035