Matter of Guzman v Spota

Matter of Guzman v Spota 2013 NY Slip Op 04803 Decided on June 26, 2013 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on June 26, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.
L. PRISCILLA HALL
PLUMMER E. LOTT
SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.
2013-04106

[*1]In the Matter of Joel Guzman, petitioner,

v

Thomas J. Spota, etc., et al., respondents.




Christopher J. Cassar, P.C., Huntington, N.Y., for petitioner.
Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Grazia
DiVincenzo of counsel), respondent
pro se.


DECISION & JUDGMENT

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition to prohibit the respondents from proceeding with an underlying criminal prosecution entitled People v Guzman, pending in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, under indictment No. 3152C-10, on the ground, inter alia, of lack of geographic jurisdiction.

ADJUDGED that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

Although a CPLR article 78 proceeding in the nature of prohibition is a proper means of challenging venue in a criminal action (see Matter of Steingut v Gold, 42 NY2d 311, 315), prohibition lies only where there is a clear legal right to that relief (see id.). Here, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to prohibition (see Matter of Prospect v Doyle, 44 AD3d 863, 863; cf. Matter of Sharkey v Town of Southold Justice Ct., 71 AD3d 1030, 1030).
BALKIN, J.P., HALL, LOTT and SGROI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court