People v Stradford

Annotate this Case
People v Stradford 2011 NY Slip Op 00785 Decided on February 10, 2011 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on February 10, 2011
Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
4237 4238

[*1]The People of the State of New York, 19690C/05 Respondent,

v

Michael Stradford, Defendant-Appellant.




Richard M. Greenberg, Office of the Appellate Defender, New
York (Matthew I. Fleischman of counsel), for appellant.
Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Justin J. Braun of
counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (William I. Mogulescu, J. at speedy trial proceedings; Barbara F. Newman, J. at jury trial and sentence), rendered December 13, 2007, as amended January 22, 2008, convicting defendant of robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 8 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant's speedy trial motion. The court properly charged the People with only seven days of the period from January 27 to March 2, 2006, since that was the period of delay the People requested after they had filed a statement of readiness (see People v Cajigas, 224 AD2d 370, 371 [1996], lv denied 88 NY2d 845 [1996]). There is no basis on which to find that the People's assertion of readiness was illusory.

This determination is dispositive of the speedy trial issue, because the remaining period at issue, even if charged to the People and added to undisputedly includable time, would not establish a speedy trial violation. In any event, the period from August 3 to September 19, 2006 was properly excluded as a postreadiness delay primarily attributable to defense counsel's impending vacation (see generally People v Anderson, 66 NY2d 529, 536 [1985]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 10, 2011

CLERK

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.