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, Respondent, v. Paul J. PRIEST, Defendant–Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.75[1][b] ) and rape in the third degree (§ 130.25[2] ). In a prior appeal, we reversed the judgment of conviction, determining that the superior court information (SCI) was jurisdictionally defective inasmuch as defendant had been charged with, inter alia, a class A felony and thus could not validly waive indictment or consent to be prosecuted by an SCI (People v. Priest, 130 AD3d 1489 [4th Dept 2015] ). We thus vacated the plea and waiver of indictment and dismissed the SCI, noting that “ ‘the People may present the case to the [g]rand [j]ury’ “ (id. at 1489).
On remittal, the People did not present the case to a grand jury but, rather, made a second attempt to proceed by SCI. As the People correctly concede, the SCI is again jurisdictionally defective inasmuch as the felony complaint charging defendant with the class A felony was not dismissed until after the waiver of indictment and plea to the SCI. As a result, defendant was still “charged” with a class A felony when he waived indictment and consented to be prosecuted by an SCI. “Where, as here, a defendant is charged with a class A felony, the defendant cannot validly waive indictment or consent to be prosecuted by a superior court information” (People v. Mayo, 21 AD3d 1316, 1316–1317 [4th Dept 2005]; see CPL 195.10[1][b]; People v. Trueluck, 88 N.Y.2d 546, 551 [1996]; Priest, 130 AD3d at 1489). We therefore vacate defendant's plea and his waiver of indictment, and we dismiss the SCI, noting again that “ ‘the People may present the case to the [g]rand [j]ury’ “ (Priest, 130 AD3d at 1489).
Based on our determination, we do not address defendant's remaining contentions.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law, the plea and waiver of indictment are vacated, the superior court information is dismissed and the matter is remitted to Jefferson County Court for proceedings pursuant to CPL 470.45.
MEMORANDUM:
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.
Decided: November 09, 2017
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)