From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Schriro

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Nov 20, 2013
111 A.D.3d 860 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-11-20

The PEOPLE, etc., ex rel. Danielle MUSCATELLO, on behalf of Kareem Davis, petitioner, v. Dora B. SCHRIRO, etc., respondent.

Robert DiDio, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Danielle Muscatello, pro se, of counsel), for petitioner. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott of counsel), for respondent.


Robert DiDio, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Danielle Muscatello, pro se, of counsel), for petitioner.Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott of counsel), for respondent.

Writ of habeas corpus in the nature of an application for the release of Kareem Davis pursuant to CPL 30.30(2)(a) upon Queens County Indictment No. 2049/12.

ADJUDGED that the writ is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The People are chargeable with less than 90 days of delay in bringing Kareem Davis to trial on Queens County Indictment No. 2049/12 ( seeCPL 30.30[2][a]; People v. Robinson, 47 A.D.3d 847, 850 N.Y.S.2d 533; cf. People v. Wearen, 98 A.D.3d 535, 949 N.Y.S.2d 170; People v. Rahim, 91 A.D.3d 970, 937 N.Y.S.2d 325). Accordingly, Kareem Davis is not entitled to release pursuant to CPL 30.30(2)(a), and the writ of habeas corpus must be dismissed. BALKIN, J.P., LOTT, AUSTIN and MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Schriro

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Nov 20, 2013
111 A.D.3d 860 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

People v. Schriro

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., ex rel. Danielle MUSCATELLO, on behalf of Kareem Davis…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Nov 20, 2013

Citations

111 A.D.3d 860 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
111 A.D.3d 860
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 7756