People v Salanardi (Vincent)

Annotate this Case
[*1] People v Salanardi (Vincent) 2009 NY Slip Op 50966(U) [23 Misc 3d 139(A)] Decided on May 12, 2009 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on May 12, 2009
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., GOLIA and STEINHARDT, JJ
2008-745 RI CR.

The People of the State of New York, Appellant,

against

Vincent Salanardi, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Richmond County (Matthew Sciarrino, J.), dated February 11, 2008. The order sua sponte dismissed the accusatory instrument on the ground that the People violated defendant's statutory right to a speedy trial.


Order reversed, on the law, accusatory instrument reinstated and matter remitted to the Criminal Court for all further proceedings.

Defendant was charged in an accusatory instrument with criminal mischief in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 145.00 [1]). On February 11, 2008, the Criminal Court sua sponte dismissed the accusatory instrument based on speedy trial grounds (see CPL 30.30 [1] [b]).

A motion to dismiss "must be made in writing and upon reasonable notice to the [P]eople" (CPL 210.45; see also CPL 170.45). Since there was no written motion to dismiss the accusatory based on speedy trial grounds before the court, and the People were not put on notice that the court was contemplating dismissal of the accusatory instrument based on said ground, the Criminal Court improperly sua sponte dismissed the accusatory instrument (see People v Clayton, 41 AD2d 204 [1973]; People v Striefler, 2003 NY Slip Op 50937[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2003]; cf. People v Alston, 191 AD2d 176 [1993]). Accordingly, the order is reversed, the accusatory instrument reinstated and the matter remitted to the Criminal Court for all further proceedings.

Pesce, P.J., Golia and Steinhardt, JJ., concur. [*2]
Decision Date: May 12, 2009

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.