From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Derisi

District Court of Suffolk County, First District
Sep 8, 1981
110 Misc. 2d 718 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1981)

Summary

In People v Derisi (110 Misc 2d 718 [Suffolk Dist Ct 1981], supra), the court found, relying on CPL 510.20, that a continuance of a temporary order of protection issued pursuant to CPL 530.12 is not valid unless the defendant is given an opportunity to be heard, which is the equivalent of a hearing.

Summary of this case from People v. Koertge

Opinion

September 8, 1981

Patrick Henry, District Attorney, for plaintiff.

Joseph F. Ruchala for defendant.


The defendant is charged with harassment (Penal Law, § 240.25, subd 1) and moves to vacate the order of protection granted, ex parte, at the request of his wife, the complainant. The question presented is whether the defendant is entitled to a hearing to determine the propriety of continuing the order of protection until the trial of this action.

One who is deprived of a property right must be afforded an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner (Barry v Barchi, 443 U.S. 55; Armstrong v Manzo, 380 U.S. 545; Matter of Jones v Berman, 37 N.Y.2d 42). Where an individual suffers a loss of property without a prior hearing, he must be given an opportunity to be heard promptly after the deprivation occurs (Barry v Barchi, supra). Further, the mere fact that the individual will eventually have a full trial of the issues does not obviate the prompt hearing requirement (Fuentes v Shevin, 407 U.S. 67).

Here, the defendant has been denied access to his home and personal possessions without a prior hearing. Although such a prehearing order is constitutionally justifiable as necessary to effect the State's interest in protecting victims of domestic violence (see Barry v Barchi, supra, prehearing suspension of trainer justified as necessary to maintain integrity of horse racing), the continuance of the order is not valid unless the defendant is given an opportunity to be heard (People v Faieta, 109 Misc.2d 841). Although no specific provision for a hearing is included in CPL 530.12 (protection for victims of family offenses), the CPL does provide a mechanism for affording the defendant this right. CPL 530.12 (subd 1) states that orders of protection may be made a condition of release on bail. Thus, the defendant is actually seeking to modify the court's bail order and such an application falls within the ambit of the hearing provision of CPL 510.20. That section provides that a defendant may be accorded an opportunity to be heard on his application to be released on his own recognizance or to fix bail in a suggested form (see People v Terrell, 62 Misc.2d 673). Therefore, pursuant to CPL 510.20 this court orders a hearing to determine the merits of the defendant's application.


Summaries of

People v. Derisi

District Court of Suffolk County, First District
Sep 8, 1981
110 Misc. 2d 718 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1981)

In People v Derisi (110 Misc 2d 718 [Suffolk Dist Ct 1981], supra), the court found, relying on CPL 510.20, that a continuance of a temporary order of protection issued pursuant to CPL 530.12 is not valid unless the defendant is given an opportunity to be heard, which is the equivalent of a hearing.

Summary of this case from People v. Koertge

In People v. Derisi, 110 Misc.2d 718, 442 N.Y.S.2d 908 (D.Ct. Suff. Cty. 1981), the court found, relying on CPL § 510.20, that a continuance of a temporary order of protection issued pursuant to CPL § 530.12 is not valid unless the defendant is given an opportunity to be heard, which is the equivalent of a hearing.

Summary of this case from People v. Koertge
Case details for

People v. Derisi

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff v. RONALD DERISI, Defendant

Court:District Court of Suffolk County, First District

Date published: Sep 8, 1981

Citations

110 Misc. 2d 718 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1981)
442 N.Y.S.2d 908

Citing Cases

People v. Forman

Following arraignment, numerous courts have held, relying on CPL 510.20, that when issues of fact are raised…

People v. Koertge

Defendant's motion challenges the constitutionality of CPL 530.12 and 530.13, arguing that the failure of…