PEOPLE v. CATAPANO (2020)

The instant motion brings attention to the issue of geography and its limitation of police authority to arrest an individual once a criminal proceeding has been commenced.

Here, the defendant moves this Court for an Order dismissing the misdemeanor charge of Aggravated Harassment in the Second Degree (Penal Law § 240.30[1][a]) lodged against him on the ground that he was arrested without authority and in violation of Criminal Procedure Law (CPL) §§ 120.70 and 120.90. The defendant also contends that dismissal is warranted because the accusatory instrument is insufficient on its face.¹

The authority to execute a warrant of arrest issued by a city, town or village court is specified in CPL § 120.70(2). The arrest warrant may be executed “(a) in the county of issuance or in any adjoining county; or (b) [a]nywhere else in the state upon the written endorsement thereon of a local criminal court of the county in which the arrest is to be made. When so endorsed, the warrant is deemed the process of the endorsing court as well as that of the issuing court.”

This statutory provision requiring the endorsement of an arrest warrant applies where the underlying basis for its issuance is the commencement of a criminal action against an accused by the filing of an accusatory instrument, with the purpose of bringing the accused before the court for arraignment upon that accusatory instrument (CPL §§ 1.20[28], 120.10[1]). This limitation on the execution of arrest warrants issued by city, town or village courts is found in the Constitution of the State of New York, Article 6, § 1(c).

Furthermore, when an accused is arrested for an offense that is not a felony, and not in the county of issuance of the arrest warrant, or in an adjoining county, the arresting police officer “must inform the defendant that he has a right to appear before a local criminal court of the county of arrest for the purpose of being released on his own recognizance or having bail fixed” (CPL § 120.90[3]).

It is apparently undisputed that the defendant was arrested on September 18, 2020 pursuant to this Court's arrest warrant issued on August 14, 2020. It is further undisputed that the defendant was arrested at 151-20 Baisley Boulevard, located in Queens County, New York. This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that Queens County, New York does not adjoin Suffolk County, New York. Further, there is no evidence that the arresting officers obtained a written endorsement of this Court's warrant by a local criminal court in Queens County. Accordingly, defendant's arrest was not authorized because it was effected in violation of CPL § 120.70(2).

There is also no evidence that the arresting officers informed the defendant that he had a right to appear before a local criminal court in Queens County; therefore, there was no compliance with CPL § 120.90(3).

For these reasons, and without opposition, the defendant's motion is granted, and the charge is dismissed. In view of this determination, the Court need not reach the defendant's remaining contentions.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment dismissing the summons.

The foregoing constitutes the Decision and Order of this Court.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The defendant, his counsel, and the Assistant District Attorney appeared before the Court on the return date of this motion, November 2, 2020, at which time the People stated on the record that they had no opposition to the instant motion.

Mary Louise A. Biunno, J.