Judge Lyle E. Frank

Tavada, charged with, among other things, DWI, moved for dismissal under CPL §30.30 arguing prosecutors denied her statutory right to a speedy trial by failing to be trial ready. She was arraigned Aug. 28, 2016 and the case adjourned. Prosecutors filed the supporting deposition and declared their readiness for trial on Sept. 27. On the next two dates scheduled for trial, Jan. 24 and Feb. 2. 2017, prosecutors stated “not ready” as the assigned ADA was unavailable. On the March 27 return date, prosecutors were not ready noting a necessary witness failed to appear, requesting an April 3 adjourn date. The court questioned how the DA the witness would appear then but, unsatisfied with the answer, declined to honor the date request. Yet, while a certificate of readiness was filed on April 3, the DA was again not ready on the May 9 return date as the witness failed to appear. The court then ruled April 3 out-of-court declaration of readiness was “illusory,” charging the DA with the full adjournment. It found prosecutors failed to establish a valid reason for their change in readiness status or to allow the court to conclude the DA was actually trial ready on April 3. The DA was charged with 96 days, exceeding the 90 days in which trial readiness was required. Dismissal was granted.

Judge Lyle E. Frank

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Go To Lexis →

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Go To Bloomberg Law →

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

NOT FOR REPRINT