Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, APPELLANT, v. DESHAUN FULMER, DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law, the motion is denied, the first superseding indictment is reinstated and the matter is remitted to Onondaga County Court for further proceedings on that indictment.
Memorandum: The People appeal from an order granting defendant's motion to dismiss the first superseding indictment on statutory speedy trial grounds (see CPL 30.30[1][a] ). We agree with the People that defendant's statutory speedy trial rights were not violated and thus that reversal is required. The People declared their readiness for trial within six months of the filing of the first accusatory instrument (see CPL 30.30[1][a]; see generally People v. Carter, 91 N.Y.2d 795, 798). County Court granted defendant's motion to dismiss the first superseding indictment on the ground that the People were charged with periods of postreadiness delay when they failed to act for a period of at least three weeks in obtaining a second saliva sample from defendant for DNA testing upon realizing that the first sample had been erroneously destroyed. “[P]ostreadiness delay may be charged to the People when the delay is attributable to their inaction and directly implicates their ability to proceed to trial” (Carter, 91 N.Y.2d at 799). Here, the absence of the DNA sample did not implicate the People's ability to proceed to trial inasmuch as the People remained ready to proceed to trial even in the absence of the DNA test results (see People v. Wright, 50 AD3d 429, 430, lv denied 10 NY3d 966; People v. Bargerstock, 192 A.D.2d 1058, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 751).
Patricia L. Morgan
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: KA 11–00105
Decided: September 30, 2011
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)