People v. Dion

In People v. Dion, 93 NY2d 893 (1999), the defendant was charged with Criminal Mischief in the Third Degree, a class E felony [Penal Law 145.05] and Petit Larceny [Penal Law 155.25], a class A misdemeanor. Thinking that the felony complaint had been reduced properly on a given date pursuant to c PL 180.50, the People announced their readiness for trial. It turned out, however, that the lower court had not complied with the requirements of CPL 180.50. The case was properly reduced on a subsequent date by reducing the count of criminal Mischief in the Third Degree to criminal Mischief in the Fourth Degree [Penal Law 145.00], at which time the People again declared their readiness for trial. The defendant was then tried and convicted of Criminal Mischief in the Fourth Degree and Petit Larceny. In rejecting the defendant's claim that he was denied a speedy trial under CPL 30.30, the Court of Appeals noted that there were less than 6 months of chargeable time to the People [See CPL 30.30(4)] and that the first statement of readiness was a valid statement as to the Petit Larceny charge "since this charged was unaffected by the procedural mechanics of CPL 180.50." The full extent of the Court's view as to the validity of the People's statement of readiness is unclear. Specifically, it is uncertain whether the Court meant that the statement of readiness was valid only as to the Petit Larceny charge or that it also covered the Criminal Mischief charge, once properly reduced. The defendant in Dion was convicted of both Criminal Mischief and Petit Larceny. Thus, the Court's conclusion as to the validity and effectiveness of the People first statement of readiness was not essential to its holding. In short, the Court was not called upon to decide specifically whether the counts should have been treated differently for purposes of CPL 30.30.