From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Filpo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 13, 1987
129 A.D.2d 649 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

April 13, 1987

Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Stolarik, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant argues on appeal that he was denied his statutory right to a speedy trial (CPL 30.30). However, since the defendant never made a pretrial motion, in writing, and on reasonable notice to the People, for dismissal of the indictment on this basis, this argument has not been preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 30.30; 210.20, 210.45 [1]; see also, People v Trevino, 114 A.D.2d 916; People v Forsyth, 112 A.D.2d 1008, appeal denied 66 N.Y.2d 763; People v Walsh, 106 A.D.2d 482).

We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions, including those advanced in his pro se brief, and find that they are either similarly unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Eiber and Sullivan, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Filpo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 13, 1987
129 A.D.2d 649 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

People v. Filpo

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DIOGENES FILPO, Also…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 13, 1987

Citations

129 A.D.2d 649 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

People v. Hess

Thus, since defendant was not prejudiced, the extreme sanction of preclusion was not required (see, People v…