Matter of Reyes v Suffolk County Traffic & Parking Violations Agency

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Matter of Reyes v Suffolk County Traffic & Parking Violations Agency 2022 NY Slip Op 34543(U) June 27, 2022 Supreme Court, Suffolk County Docket Number: Index No. 623973/2021 Judge: George Nolan Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. INDEX NO. 623973/2021 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 06/28/2022 03:19 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/28/2022 Short F'orm Ordcr Index No. 623973/2021 SUPREME COURT_ STA'I'E OF NEW YORK PART 55 - STJFFOLK COUNTY PRESENT: Hon, Geolp Nolan Justice Supreme Court ------x In the Applioation of YESICA REYES, Mot. Seq. No. 001 - MG CaseDisp Orig. Retum Dxe: 0l/2112022 Mot. Submit Date: 04/1312022 Petitioner, PIAITTONER'S ATTORNEY For a Judgment Pusuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules SCOl*l' C. LOCKWOOD, IISQ 375 Commack Road, Suite 200 Deer Park, NY I 1729 -agalnst- RESPONDE NI'S'ATTORNEY SUFFOLK COI]NTY ATTORNEY'S TIIE SI]FFOI,K COT'NTY TRAFFIC AND PARKING VIOLATIONS ACENCY, and KENNETH DIAMOND, OFFICL, 100 Veterans Memorial Highway I lauppauge, NY I 1788 llcspondents. tjpon the e-filed documents numbered 0l through 19, and upon duc deliberation and consideration by the Court ofthe foregoing papers, it is hereby ORDERED rhat the motion of respondents Suffolk Coiurty Traffic and Parking Violations Agency and Kenneth Diamond for an order pursuant to CPI-R 321I (a)(2), (3), (5) and (8) and CPI.R 7804(0, dismissing the petition ol Yesica Reyes, is grantcd. The respondent Sullblk Country'l'raflic and Parking Violations Agency ("SCTPVA") is authorized under various provisions of state and local law to assist the Suffolk County District Court in the disposition of traffic and parking in&actions. Vehiclc and Traffic Law $1690(l) authorizes the Administrative Judge of Suflblk County to assign judicial hearing officers to conducl the trials of these low level, non-criminal matters. Vehicle and TraIIic t,aw $1690(1) further provides rhat "suchjudicial hearing officers shall bc village courtjustices or retircd judges either ofwhich shall have at least trl'o years ofexperience conducting trials ofhaffic and parking violations cases and shall be admitted to practice law in this state." Respondent Diamond is a judicial hearing officer for the SCTPVA. It is undisputed that on May 9, 2019, petitioner Yesica Reyes was convicred of speeding after being tried in absentia before JHO Diamond in the SCTPVA. The pctitioner appealed her conviction to thc Appellate Term, Second Department, 9th and l0s Judicial District, arguing that [* 1] 1 of 2 INDEX NO. 623973/2021 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 06/28/2022 03:19 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/28/2022 Diamond abused his discretion when he denied her counsel's request for an adjoumment. By a decision datcd December 9, 2021, the Appellate Term affirmed petitioner's conviction. On Dccember 30, 2021, the petitioner initiated this Anicle 78 proceeding seeking a judgment l) in the natue of a wrir of certiorari against respondent SC'|PVA, vacating her conviction on the basis that Diamond was "barrcd from exercising judicial power in the County of Suffolk, sincc he resided, and resides in the County ol Nassau" and 2) in the naturc of a wfit of prohibition, barring Diamond from serving iu a SCTPVA hearing officer because he resides in Nassau County. The petilioner argues that SCTPVA judicial hearing officers must reside in the County of Suffolk because the Statc Constitution requires Distdct Court judges 1o reside in the district in which they sit (NY (lonstitution Article 6, Section l6[h]). The certiorari branch of the petition which seeks to vacaLe the petitioner's speeding conviction, interposed more than two years after the conviction was handed down and after it was affirmed by the Appcllate Term is barred by the four-month statute of limitations applicable to this proceeding (CPLR 217). "[Al petition seeking a writ of prohibition must demonstrate that: l) a body or ofllccr is acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity. 2) that body or officer is proceeding or threarening to proceed in exoess ol' its jurisdiction and 3) petitioner has a clear legal right to the relief requested" (Mdrre r of Town of Huntington v. New York Slate Div. of Human Rrgr/s, 82 NY2d 783,604 NYS2d s4l ile93ll). Preliminarily, it appears that prohibition does not lie in this matter as the petitioner is seeking to review and vacale a determination already made by the respondents, not restrain thc respondents' cont'inuing exercise of authority (see Vargason v. Brunetli, 241 ADZ1 941, 661 NYS2d 345 [41h Dept 1997]). To the extent petitioner seeks a judgment barring Diamond from serving as ajudicial hcaring officer in other matters assigned to the SCTPVA. the Court concludes that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to this reliei. 'fhe petirion fails to cite any constitutional or stalutory provision which imposes a residency requirement upon SCTPVA judicial hearing officers. Based on the lbregoing, the petition herein is dismissed. l his constitutes the decision and Ordcr ofthc Coun. ENTI,] DATE: June 27,2022 Riverhead, NY FION. GIIORGE NOLAN. J.S.C X [* 2] FINAL DISPOSI ION _ NON-FINAL DtSPOSI'ftON 2 of 2

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.